Knowledge without Wisdom: Measuring Misalignment between LLMs and Intended Impact

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.00883v1
• Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2026 03:05:46 GMT
• Title: Knowledge without Wisdom: Measuring Misalignment between LLMs and Intended Impact
• Authors: Michael Hardy, Yunsung Kim,
• Abstract summary: LLMs increasingly excel on AI benchmarks, but doing so does not guarantee validity for downstream tasks.<n>This study evaluates the performance of leading foundation models with out-of-distribution tasks of the teaching and learning of schoolchildren.
• Score: 3.437656066916039
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: LLMs increasingly excel on AI benchmarks, but doing so does not guarantee validity for downstream tasks. This study evaluates the performance of leading foundation models (FMs, i.e., generative pre-trained base LLMs) with out-of-distribution (OOD) tasks of the teaching and learning of schoolchildren. Across all FMs, inter-model behaviors on disparate tasks correlate higher than they do with expert human behaviors on target tasks. These biases shared across LLMs are poorly aligned with downstream measures of teaching quality and often \textit{negatively aligned with learning outcomes}. Further, we find multi-model ensembles, both unanimous model voting and expert-weighting by benchmark performance, further exacerbate misalignment with learning. We measure that 50\% of the variation in misalignment error is shared across foundation models, suggesting that common pretraining accounts for much of the misalignment in these tasks. We demonstrate methods for robustly measuring alignment of complex tasks and provide unique insights into both educational applications of foundation models and to understanding limitations of models.

Related papers

• Teach2Eval: An Indirect Evaluation Method for LLM by Judging How It Teaches [46.0474342507327]
  We introduce Teach2Eval, an indirect evaluation framework inspired by the Feynman Technique.<n>Our method evaluates a model's multiple abilities to teach weaker student models to perform tasks effectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-18T06:51:10Z)
• Injecting Imbalance Sensitivity for Multi-Task Learning [36.60453299563175]
  Multi-task learning (MTL) has emerged as a promising approach for deploying deep learning models in real-life applications.<n>Recent studies have proposed optimization-based learning paradigms to establish task-shared representations in MTL.<n>Our paper empirically argues that these studies primarily emphasize the conflict issue while neglecting the potentially more significant impact of imbalance/dominance in MTL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-11T03:11:54Z)
• The Inherent Limits of Pretrained LLMs: The Unexpected Convergence of Instruction Tuning and In-Context Learning Capabilities [51.594836904623534]
  We investigate whether instruction-tuned models possess fundamentally different capabilities from base models that are prompted using in-context examples.<n>We show that the performance of instruction-tuned models is significantly correlated with the in-context performance of their base counterparts.<n>Specifically, we extend this understanding to instruction-tuned models, suggesting that their pretraining data similarly sets a limiting boundary on the tasks they can solve.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-15T10:57:55Z)
• CoMMIT: Coordinated Multimodal Instruction Tuning [90.1532838391285]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) generally involve cooperative learning between a backbone LLM and a feature encoder of non-text input modalities.<n>In this paper, we analyze the MLLM instruction tuning from both theoretical and empirical perspectives.<n>We propose a Multimodal Balance Coefficient that enables quantitative measurement of the balance of learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T23:18:55Z)
• Towards Effective Evaluations and Comparisons for LLM Unlearning Methods [97.2995389188179]
  This paper seeks to refine the evaluation of machine unlearning for large language models.<n>It addresses two key challenges -- the robustness of evaluation metrics and the trade-offs between competing goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T14:41:00Z)
• Uncertainty Aware Learning for Language Model Alignment [97.36361196793929]
  We propose uncertainty-aware learning (UAL) to improve the model alignment of different task scenarios. We implement UAL in a simple fashion -- adaptively setting the label smoothing value of training according to the uncertainty of individual samples. Experiments on widely used benchmarks demonstrate that our UAL significantly and consistently outperforms standard supervised fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-07T11:37:45Z)
• Large Language Models are Biased Reinforcement Learners [0.0]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) exhibit behavioral signatures of a relative value bias. Computational cognitive modeling reveals that LLM behavior is well-described by a simple RL algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-19T01:43:52Z)
• TRACE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Continual Learning in Large Language Models [52.734140807634624]
  Aligned large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional capabilities in task-solving, following instructions, and ensuring safety. Existing continual learning benchmarks lack sufficient challenge for leading aligned LLMs. We introduce TRACE, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate continual learning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T16:38:49Z)
• Mitigating the Alignment Tax of RLHF [76.4300447532456]
  aligning LLMs under Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback can lead to forgetting pretrained abilities, also known as the alignment tax. We propose model averaging to maximize alignment performance while incurring minimal alignment tax. We validate HMA's performance across a range of RLHF algorithms over OpenLLaMA-3B and further extend our findings to Mistral-7B.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-12T14:16:54Z)
• Improving Open Information Extraction with Large Language Models: A Study on Demonstration Uncertainty [52.72790059506241]
  Open Information Extraction (OIE) task aims at extracting structured facts from unstructured text. Despite the potential of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT as a general task solver, they lag behind state-of-the-art (supervised) methods in OIE tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-07T01:35:24Z)
• Revisiting Unsupervised Meta-Learning: Amplifying or Compensating for the Characteristics of Few-Shot Tasks [30.893785366366078]
  We develop a practical approach towards few-shot image classification, where a visual recognition system is constructed with limited data. We find that the base class set labels are not necessary, and discriminative embeddings could be meta-learned in an unsupervised manner. Experiments on few-shot learning benchmarks verify our approaches outperform previous methods by a 4-10% performance gap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-30T10:08:35Z)
• Task-Feature Collaborative Learning with Application to Personalized Attribute Prediction [166.87111665908333]
  We propose a novel multi-task learning method called Task-Feature Collaborative Learning (TFCL) Specifically, we first propose a base model with a heterogeneous block-diagonal structure regularizer to leverage the collaborative grouping of features and tasks. As a practical extension, we extend the base model by allowing overlapping features and differentiating the hard tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-29T02:32:04Z)

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.