Kaushiki Nag

2papers

2 Papers

4.4AIJan 15
Is More Context Always Better? Examining LLM Reasoning Capability for Time Interval Prediction

Yanan Cao, Farnaz Fallahi, Murali Mohana Krishna Dandu et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in reasoning and prediction across different domains. Yet, their ability to infer temporal regularities from structured behavioral data remains underexplored. This paper presents a systematic study investigating whether LLMs can predict time intervals between recurring user actions, such as repeated purchases, and how different levels of contextual information shape their predictive behavior. Using a simple but representative repurchase scenario, we benchmark state-of-the-art LLMs in zero-shot settings against both statistical and machine-learning models. Two key findings emerge. First, while LLMs surpass lightweight statistical baselines, they consistently underperform dedicated machine-learning models, showing their limited ability to capture quantitative temporal structure. Second, although moderate context can improve LLM accuracy, adding further user-level detail degrades performance. These results challenge the assumption that "more context leads to better reasoning". Our study highlights fundamental limitations of today's LLMs in structured temporal inference and offers guidance for designing future context-aware hybrid models that integrate statistical precision with linguistic flexibility.

10.4LGApr 24, 2024
Debiasing Machine Unlearning with Counterfactual Examples

Ziheng Chen, Jia Wang, Jun Zhuang et al.

The right to be forgotten (RTBF) seeks to safeguard individuals from the enduring effects of their historical actions by implementing machine-learning techniques. These techniques facilitate the deletion of previously acquired knowledge without requiring extensive model retraining. However, they often overlook a critical issue: unlearning processes bias. This bias emerges from two main sources: (1) data-level bias, characterized by uneven data removal, and (2) algorithm-level bias, which leads to the contamination of the remaining dataset, thereby degrading model accuracy. In this work, we analyze the causal factors behind the unlearning process and mitigate biases at both data and algorithmic levels. Typically, we introduce an intervention-based approach, where knowledge to forget is erased with a debiased dataset. Besides, we guide the forgetting procedure by leveraging counterfactual examples, as they maintain semantic data consistency without hurting performance on the remaining dataset. Experimental results demonstrate that our method outperforms existing machine unlearning baselines on evaluation metrics.