Clarifying Ambiguities: on the Role of Ambiguity Types in Prompting Methods for Clarification Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.12113v2
• Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 10:56:44 GMT
• Title: Clarifying Ambiguities: on the Role of Ambiguity Types in Prompting Methods for Clarification Generation
• Authors: Anfu Tang, Laure Soulier, Vincent Guigue,
• Abstract summary: We focus on the concept of ambiguity for clarification, seeking to model and integrate ambiguities in the clarification process.<n>We name this new prompting scheme Ambiguity Type-Chain of Thought (AT-CoT)
• Score: 5.259846811078731
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In information retrieval (IR), providing appropriate clarifications to better understand users' information needs is crucial for building a proactive search-oriented dialogue system. Due to the strong in-context learning ability of large language models (LLMs), recent studies investigate prompting methods to generate clarifications using few-shot or Chain of Thought (CoT) prompts. However, vanilla CoT prompting does not distinguish the characteristics of different information needs, making it difficult to understand how LLMs resolve ambiguities in user queries. In this work, we focus on the concept of ambiguity for clarification, seeking to model and integrate ambiguities in the clarification process. To this end, we comprehensively study the impact of prompting schemes based on reasoning and ambiguity for clarification. The idea is to enhance the reasoning abilities of LLMs by limiting CoT to predict first ambiguity types that can be interpreted as instructions to clarify, then correspondingly generate clarifications. We name this new prompting scheme Ambiguity Type-Chain of Thought (AT-CoT). Experiments are conducted on various datasets containing human-annotated clarifying questions to compare AT-CoT with multiple baselines. We also perform user simulations to implicitly measure the quality of generated clarifications under various IR scenarios.

Related papers

• CLEAR-KGQA: Clarification-Enhanced Ambiguity Resolution for Knowledge Graph Question Answering [13.624962763072899]
  KGQA systems typically assume user queries are unambiguous, which is an assumption that rarely holds in real-world applications.<n>We propose a novel framework that dynamically handles both entity ambiguity (e.g., distinguishing between entities with similar names) and intent ambiguity (e.g., clarifying different interpretations of user queries) through interactive clarification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-13T17:34:35Z)
• Improving Multilingual Retrieval-Augmented Language Models through Dialectic Reasoning Argumentations [65.11348389219887]
  We introduce Dialectic-RAG (DRAG), a modular approach that evaluates retrieved information by comparing, contrasting, and resolving conflicting perspectives. We show the impact of our framework both as an in-context learning strategy and for constructing demonstrations to instruct smaller models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T06:55:15Z)
• Contextualizing Search Queries In-Context Learning for Conversational Rewriting with LLMs [0.0]
  This paper introduces Prompt-Guided In-Context Learning, a novel approach for few-shot conversational query rewriting.<n>Our method employs carefully designed prompts, incorporating task descriptions, input/output format specifications, and a small set of illustrative examples.<n>Experiments on benchmark datasets, TREC and Taskmaster-1, demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T20:02:42Z)
• On the Loss of Context-awareness in General Instruction Fine-tuning [101.03941308894191]
  We investigate the loss of context awareness after supervised fine-tuning.<n>We find that the performance decline is associated with a bias toward different roles learned during conversational instruction fine-tuning.<n>We propose a metric to identify context-dependent examples from general instruction fine-tuning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-05T00:16:01Z)
• Understanding the Relationship between Prompts and Response Uncertainty in Large Language Models [55.332004960574004]
  Large language models (LLMs) are widely used in decision-making, but their reliability, especially in critical tasks like healthcare, is not well-established.<n>This paper investigates how the uncertainty of responses generated by LLMs relates to the information provided in the input prompt.<n>We propose a prompt-response concept model that explains how LLMs generate responses and helps understand the relationship between prompts and response uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T11:19:58Z)
• Dissecting Paraphrases: The Impact of Prompt Syntax and supplementary Information on Knowledge Retrieval from Pretrained Language Models [8.588056811772693]
  ConPARE-LAMA is a probe consisting of 34 million distinct prompts that facilitate comparison across minimal paraphrases. ConPARE-LAMA enables insights into the independent impact of either syntactical form or semantic information of paraphrases on the knowledge retrieval performance of PLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-02T14:35:08Z)
• Uncertainty Quantification for In-Context Learning of Large Language Models [52.891205009620364]
  In-context learning has emerged as a groundbreaking ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) We propose a novel formulation and corresponding estimation method to quantify both types of uncertainties. The proposed method offers an unsupervised way to understand the prediction of in-context learning in a plug-and-play fashion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T18:46:24Z)
• Clarify When Necessary: Resolving Ambiguity Through Interaction with LMs [58.620269228776294]
  We propose a task-agnostic framework for resolving ambiguity by asking users clarifying questions. We evaluate systems across three NLP applications: question answering, machine translation and natural language inference. We find that intent-sim is robust, demonstrating improvements across a wide range of NLP tasks and LMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T00:18:50Z)
• Active Prompting with Chain-of-Thought for Large Language Models [26.5029080638055]
  This paper proposes a new method, Active-Prompt, to adapt large language models to different tasks. By borrowing ideas from the related problem of uncertainty-based active learning, we introduce several metrics to characterize the uncertainty. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of our proposed method, achieving state-of-the-art on eight complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-23T18:58:59Z)
• Supporting Vision-Language Model Inference with Confounder-pruning Knowledge Prompt [71.77504700496004]
  Vision-language models are pre-trained by aligning image-text pairs in a common space to deal with open-set visual concepts. To boost the transferability of the pre-trained models, recent works adopt fixed or learnable prompts. However, how and what prompts can improve inference performance remains unclear.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T07:51:15Z)
• Shepherd Pre-trained Language Models to Develop a Train of Thought: An Iterative Prompting Approach [30.117038793151004]
  Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) have been shown incapable of recalling knowledge to solve tasks requiring complex & multi-step inference procedures. Similar to how humans develop a "train of thought" for these tasks, how can we equip PLMs with such abilities? We propose an iterative context-aware prompter, which addresses these limitations by learning to dynamically synthesize conditioned prompts on the current step's contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-16T04:12:20Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.