TrackList: Tracing Back Query Linguistic Diversity for Head and Tail Knowledge in Open Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.21006v2
• Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 05:15:16 GMT
• Title: TrackList: Tracing Back Query Linguistic Diversity for Head and Tail Knowledge in Open Large Language Models
• Authors: Ioana Buhnila, Aman Sinha, Mathieu Constant,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have proven efficient in giving definition-type answers to user input queries.<n>We evaluated this drop in performance using TrackList, a fine-grained linguistic and statistical analysis pipeline.<n>We studied whether the high frequency of a concept (head) or low frequency (tail) impacts the language model's performance.
• Score: 1.634029945636262
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have proven efficient in giving definition-type answers to user input queries. While for humans giving various types of answers, such as examples and paraphrases, is an easy task, LLMs struggle to provide correct answers for other than definition-type queries. In this study, we evaluated this drop in performance using TrackList, a fine-grained linguistic and statistical analysis pipeline to investigate the impact of the pre-training data on LLMs answers to diverse linguistic queries. We also introduce RefoMed-EN, an English dataset consisting of 6170 human-annotated medical terms alongside their corresponding definitions, denominations, exemplifications, explanations, or paraphrases. We studied whether the high frequency of a concept (head) or low frequency (tail) impacts the language model's performance. We evaluated the quality of the LLM's output using syntactic and semantic similarity metrics, statistical correlations and embeddings. Results showed that the LLM's task performance for definition type questions is the highest, while for the exemplification type it is the lowest. Additionally, we showed that for definition-type questions, large language models are prone to paraphrase more on popular and frequent knowledge and less on tail and technical knowledge, especially in the expert texts.

Related papers

• Tokenization and Representation Biases in Multilingual Models on Dialectal NLP Tasks [7.216732751280017]
  We correlate Tokenization Parity (TP) and Information Parity (IP) as measures of representational biases in pre-trained multilingual models.<n>We compare state-of-the-art decoder-only LLMs with encoder-based models across three tasks: dialect classification, topic classification, and extractive question answering.<n>Our analysis reveals that TP is a better predictor of the performance on tasks reliant on syntactic and morphological cues, while IP better predicts performance in semantic tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T12:13:53Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Model with Knowledge Oriented Language Specific Simple Question Answering [73.73820209993515]
  We introduce KoLasSimpleQA, the first benchmark evaluating the multilingual factual ability of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Inspired by existing research, we created the question set with features such as single knowledge point coverage, absolute objectivity, unique answers, and temporal stability.<n>Results show significant performance differences between the two domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T12:27:02Z)
• ExpliCa: Evaluating Explicit Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models [75.05436691700572]
  We introduce ExpliCa, a new dataset for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) in explicit causal reasoning.<n>We tested seven commercial and open-source LLMs on ExpliCa through prompting and perplexity-based metrics.<n>Surprisingly, models tend to confound temporal relations with causal ones, and their performance is also strongly influenced by the linguistic order of the events.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T14:23:14Z)
• Multilingual Needle in a Haystack: Investigating Long-Context Behavior of Multilingual Large Language Models [22.859955360764275]
  We introduce the MultiLingual Needle-in-a-Haystack (MLNeedle) test to assess a model's ability to retrieve relevant information. We evaluate four state-of-the-art large language models on MLNeedle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-19T17:02:06Z)
• Generalization v.s. Memorization: Tracing Language Models' Capabilities Back to Pretraining Data [76.90128359866462]
  We introduce an extended concept of memorization, distributional memorization, which measures the correlation between the output probabilities and the pretraining data frequency.<n>This study demonstrates that memorization plays a larger role in simpler, knowledge-intensive tasks, while generalization is the key for harder, reasoning-based tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T21:24:40Z)
• Holmes: A Benchmark to Assess the Linguistic Competence of Language Models [59.627729608055006]
  We introduce Holmes, a new benchmark designed to assess language models (LMs) linguistic competence. We use computation-based probing to examine LMs' internal representations regarding distinct linguistic phenomena. As a result, we meet recent calls to disentangle LMs' linguistic competence from other cognitive abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T17:58:36Z)
• Beware of Words: Evaluating the Lexical Diversity of Conversational LLMs using ChatGPT as Case Study [3.0059120458540383]
  We consider the evaluation of the lexical richness of the text generated by conversational Large Language Models (LLMs) and how it depends on the model parameters. The results show how lexical richness depends on the version of ChatGPT and some of its parameters, such as the presence penalty, or on the role assigned to the model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-11T13:41:17Z)
• An Investigation of LLMs' Inefficacy in Understanding Converse Relations [30.94718664430869]
  We introduce a new benchmark ConvRe focusing on converse relations, which contains 17 relations and 1240 triples extracted from knowledge graph completion datasets. Our ConvRE features two tasks, Re2Text and Text2Re, which are formulated as multi-choice question answering to evaluate LLMs' ability to determine the matching between relations and associated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-08T13:45:05Z)
• Syntax and Semantics Meet in the "Middle": Probing the Syntax-Semantics Interface of LMs Through Agentivity [68.8204255655161]
  We present the semantic notion of agentivity as a case study for probing such interactions. This suggests LMs may potentially serve as more useful tools for linguistic annotation, theory testing, and discovery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T16:24:01Z)
• Using Natural Language Explanations to Rescale Human Judgments [81.66697572357477]
  We propose a method to rescale ordinal annotations and explanations using large language models (LLMs)<n>We feed annotators' Likert ratings and corresponding explanations into an LLM and prompt it to produce a numeric score anchored in a scoring rubric.<n>Our method rescales the raw judgments without impacting agreement and brings the scores closer to human judgments grounded in the same scoring rubric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T06:19:14Z)
• Did the Cat Drink the Coffee? Challenging Transformers with Generalized Event Knowledge [59.22170796793179]
  Transformers Language Models (TLMs) were tested on a benchmark for the textitdynamic estimation of thematic fit Our results show that TLMs can reach performances that are comparable to those achieved by SDM. However, additional analysis consistently suggests that TLMs do not capture important aspects of event knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-22T20:52:26Z)

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.