-
Semantic Structure-Mapping in LLM and Human Analogical Reasoning
Authors:
Sam Musker,
Alex Duchnowski,
Raphaël Millière,
Ellie Pavlick
Abstract:
Analogical reasoning is considered core to human learning and cognition. Recent studies have compared the analogical reasoning abilities of human subjects and Large Language Models (LLMs) on abstract symbol manipulation tasks, such as letter string analogies. However, these studies largely neglect analogical reasoning over semantically meaningful symbols, such as natural language words. This abili…
▽ More
Analogical reasoning is considered core to human learning and cognition. Recent studies have compared the analogical reasoning abilities of human subjects and Large Language Models (LLMs) on abstract symbol manipulation tasks, such as letter string analogies. However, these studies largely neglect analogical reasoning over semantically meaningful symbols, such as natural language words. This ability to draw analogies that link language to non-linguistic domains, which we term semantic structure-mapping, is thought to play a crucial role in language acquisition and broader cognitive development. We test human subjects and LLMs on analogical reasoning tasks that require the transfer of semantic structure and content from one domain to another. Advanced LLMs match human performance across many task variations. However, humans and LLMs respond differently to certain task variations and semantic distractors. Overall, our data suggest that LLMs are approaching human-level performance on these important cognitive tasks, but are not yet entirely human like.
△ Less
Submitted 19 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Testing Causal Models of Word Meaning in GPT-3 and -4
Authors:
Sam Musker,
Ellie Pavlick
Abstract:
Large Language Models (LLMs) have driven extraordinary improvements in NLP. However, it is unclear how such models represent lexical concepts-i.e., the meanings of the words they use. This paper evaluates the lexical representations of GPT-3 and GPT-4 through the lens of HIPE theory, a theory of concept representations which focuses on representations of words describing artifacts (such as "mop",…
▽ More
Large Language Models (LLMs) have driven extraordinary improvements in NLP. However, it is unclear how such models represent lexical concepts-i.e., the meanings of the words they use. This paper evaluates the lexical representations of GPT-3 and GPT-4 through the lens of HIPE theory, a theory of concept representations which focuses on representations of words describing artifacts (such as "mop", "pencil", and "whistle"). The theory posits a causal graph that relates the meanings of such words to the form, use, and history of the objects to which they refer. We test LLMs using the same stimuli originally used by Chaigneau et al. (2004) to evaluate the theory in humans, and consider a variety of prompt designs. Our experiments concern judgements about causal outcomes, object function, and object naming. We find no evidence that GPT-3 encodes the causal structure hypothesized by HIPE, but do find evidence that GPT-4 encodes such structure. The results contribute to a growing body of research characterizing the representational capacity of large language models.
△ Less
Submitted 23 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
Six Attributes of Unhealthy Conversation
Authors:
Ilan Price,
Jordan Gifford-Moore,
Jory Fleming,
Saul Musker,
Maayan Roichman,
Guillaume Sylvain,
Nithum Thain,
Lucas Dixon,
Jeffrey Sorensen
Abstract:
We present a new dataset of approximately 44000 comments labeled by crowdworkers. Each comment is labelled as either 'healthy' or 'unhealthy', in addition to binary labels for the presence of six potentially 'unhealthy' sub-attributes: (1) hostile; (2) antagonistic, insulting, provocative or trolling; (3) dismissive; (4) condescending or patronising; (5) sarcastic; and/or (6) an unfair generalisat…
▽ More
We present a new dataset of approximately 44000 comments labeled by crowdworkers. Each comment is labelled as either 'healthy' or 'unhealthy', in addition to binary labels for the presence of six potentially 'unhealthy' sub-attributes: (1) hostile; (2) antagonistic, insulting, provocative or trolling; (3) dismissive; (4) condescending or patronising; (5) sarcastic; and/or (6) an unfair generalisation. Each label also has an associated confidence score. We argue that there is a need for datasets which enable research based on a broad notion of 'unhealthy online conversation'. We build this typology to encompass a substantial proportion of the individual comments which contribute to unhealthy online conversation. For some of these attributes, this is the first publicly available dataset of this scale. We explore the quality of the dataset, present some summary statistics and initial models to illustrate the utility of this data, and highlight limitations and directions for further research.
△ Less
Submitted 14 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
