Prateek Rajput

h-index1
2papers
2citations

2 Papers

21.4CLOct 3, 2023
Large Language Models Meet Knowledge Graphs to Answer Factoid Questions

Mikhail Salnikov, Hai Le, Prateek Rajput et al.

Recently, it has been shown that the incorporation of structured knowledge into Large Language Models significantly improves the results for a variety of NLP tasks. In this paper, we propose a method for exploring pre-trained Text-to-Text Language Models enriched with additional information from Knowledge Graphs for answering factoid questions. More specifically, we propose an algorithm for subgraphs extraction from a Knowledge Graph based on question entities and answer candidates. Then, we procure easily interpreted information with Transformer-based models through the linearization of the extracted subgraphs. Final re-ranking of the answer candidates with the extracted information boosts Hits@1 scores of the pre-trained text-to-text language models by 4-6%.

4.5CLMay 16
Evaluation Drift in LLM Personality Induction: Are We Moving the Goalpost?

Prateek Rajput, Yewei Song, Iyiola E. Olatunji et al.

Can large language models reliably express a human-like personality, or are they merely mimicking surface cues without a stable underlying profile? To investigate this, we induce personality in LLMs by fine-tuning them on the long-form essays, where each essay is associated with a target Big Five personality profile. We then evaluate the stability and fidelity of the induced personality using the IPIP-NEO questionnaire. Specifically, we ask: (i) does post-training (SFT, DPO, ORPO) stabilize questionnaire scores under prompt rephrasings, and (ii) can it induce target Big Five profiles from unguided essays? Our results demonstrate that fine-tuning consistently reduces variance in questionnaire responses across five models, directly mitigating the evaluation fragility reported in pre-trained models. However, this newfound stability reveals a more fundamental limitation: accuracy on the full five-dimensional profile remains near chance, even when single-trait scores improve. This indicates that unguided essays lack the cues needed for faithful personality expression. We therefore argue for scenario-grounded datasets or interactive elicitation that accumulates test-aligned evidence over time.