Anastasiia Sedova

Anastasiia Sedova, Robert Litschko, Diego Frassinelli et al.

One of the major aspects contributing to the striking performance of large language models (LLMs) is the vast amount of factual knowledge accumulated during pre-training. Yet, many LLMs suffer from self-inconsistency, which raises doubts about their trustworthiness and reliability. This paper focuses on entity type ambiguity, analyzing the proficiency and consistency of state-of-the-art LLMs in applying factual knowledge when prompted with ambiguous entities. To do so, we propose an evaluation protocol that disentangles knowing from applying knowledge, and test state-of-the-art LLMs on 49 ambiguous entities. Our experiments reveal that LLMs struggle with choosing the correct entity reading, achieving an average accuracy of only 85%, and as low as 75% with underspecified prompts. The results also reveal systematic discrepancies in LLM behavior, showing that while the models may possess knowledge, they struggle to apply it consistently, exhibit biases toward preferred readings, and display self-inconsistencies. This highlights the need to address entity ambiguity in the future for more trustworthy LLMs.

Yuxi Xia, Anastasiia Sedova, Pedro Henrique Luz de Araujo et al.

Training data memorization in language models impacts model capability (generalization) and safety (privacy risk). This paper focuses on analyzing prompts' impact on detecting the memorization of 6 masked language model-based named entity recognition models. Specifically, we employ a diverse set of 400 automatically generated prompts, and a pairwise dataset where each pair consists of one person's name from the training set and another name out of the set. A prompt completed with a person's name serves as input for getting the model's confidence in predicting this name. Finally, the prompt performance of detecting model memorization is quantified by the percentage of name pairs for which the model has higher confidence for the name from the training set. We show that the performance of different prompts varies by as much as 16 percentage points on the same model, and prompt engineering further increases the gap. Moreover, our experiments demonstrate that prompt performance is model-dependent but does generalize across different name sets. A comprehensive analysis indicates how prompt performance is influenced by prompt properties, contained tokens, and the model's self-attention weights on the prompt.

Vasiliki Kougia, Anastasiia Sedova, Andreas Stephan et al.

This paper presents the first study for temporal relation extraction in a zero-shot setting focusing on biomedical text. We employ two types of prompts and five LLMs (GPT-3.5, Mixtral, Llama 2, Gemma, and PMC-LLaMA) to obtain responses about the temporal relations between two events. Our experiments demonstrate that LLMs struggle in the zero-shot setting performing worse than fine-tuned specialized models in terms of F1 score, showing that this is a challenging task for LLMs. We further contribute a novel comprehensive temporal analysis by calculating consistency scores for each LLM. Our findings reveal that LLMs face challenges in providing responses consistent to the temporal properties of uniqueness and transitivity. Moreover, we study the relation between the temporal consistency of an LLM and its accuracy and whether the latter can be improved by solving temporal inconsistencies. Our analysis shows that even when temporal consistency is achieved, the predictions can remain inaccurate.