arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
​通知:联邦节假日调休:哥伦布日 / 原住民日(Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day),今日(13日)无更新。
arXiv 2306.04610cs.CLcs.AI

双词测试:面向大型语言模型的语义基准

The Two Word Test: A Semantic Benchmark for Large Language Models

University of South Carolina(南卡罗来纳大学)

Nicholas Riccardi, Rutvik H. Desai

AI总结:

本文提出开源双词语义基准TWT,通过1768个人类评分的名词组合测试LLM,发现GPT-4等模型仍显著落后于人类,提示其语义理解存在局限。

摘要:

大型语言模型(LLM)近来展现出非凡能力,包括通过高级专业考试和高要求基准测试。这种表现使许多人认为,它们已接近实现类人或“真正的”语言理解,甚至接近人工通用智能(AGI)。在此,我们提供一个新的开源基准,利用双词短语评估LLM的语义能力;该任务无需高级训练,人类即可相对轻松地完成。将多个词组合成单一概念是人类语言和智能的一个基本方面。该测试要求对1768个名词-名词组合进行有意义性判断,这些组合已由150名人类评分者评定为有意义(例如 baby boy)或无意义(例如 goat sky)。我们提供了探测0—4分量表有意义性评分的任务版本,也提供了二元判断版本。我们使用TWT在GPT-4、GPT-3.5和Bard上开展了一系列实验,并采用两种版本。结果表明,与人类相比,所有模型在评定这些短语的有意义性方面表现都很差。GPT-3.5和Bard也无法在合理短语与无意义短语之间作出二元区分,会将无意义短语判断为有意义。GPT-4在组合短语的二元区分上有显著提升,但仍明显差于人类表现。TWT可用于理解当前LLM的局限和弱点,并有可能改进它们。该测试也提醒我们,在将“真正理解”或AGI归于LLM时应保持谨慎。TWT可在 https://github.com/NickRiccardi/two-word-test 获取。

英文摘要:

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable abilities recently, including passing advanced professional exams and demanding benchmark tests. This performance has led many to suggest that they are close to achieving humanlike or 'true' understanding of language, and even Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). Here, we provide a new open-source benchmark that can assess semantic abilities of LLMs using two-word phrases using a task that can be performed relatively easily by humans without advanced training. Combining multiple words into a single concept is a fundamental aspect of human language and intelligence. The test requires meaningfulness judgments of 1768 noun-noun combinations that have been rated as meaningful (e.g., baby boy) or not meaningful (e.g., goat sky). by 150 human raters. We provide versions of the task that probe meaningfulness ratings on a 0-4 scale as well as binary judgments. We conducted a series of experiments using the TWT on GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and Bard, with both versions. Results demonstrated that, compared to humans, all models perform poorly at rating meaningfulness of these phrases. GPT-3.5 and Bard are also unable to make binary discriminations between sensible and nonsense phrases as making sense. GPT-4 makes a substantial improvement in binary discrimination of combinatorial phrases but is still significantly worse than human performance. The TWT can be used to understand the limitations and weaknesses of current LLMs, and potentially improve them. The test also reminds us that caution is warranted in attributing 'true understanding' or AGI to LLMs. TWT is available at: https://github.com/NickRiccardi/two-word-test

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑