Are Large Language Models Consistent over Value-laden Questions?

Overview

• This paper investigates the consistency of large language models (LLMs) in their responses to value-laden questions.
• The researchers examine whether LLMs provide stable and coherent answers to ethical and political questions, or if their responses vary significantly across multiple prompts.
• The study aims to shed light on the reliability and robustness of LLMs when it comes to subjective, opinion-based topics.

Plain English Explanation

In this paper, the researchers explore whether large language models (LLMs) - powerful AI systems that can generate human-like text - are consistent in how they respond to questions on sensitive, value-laden topics. These could be ethical dilemmas, political issues, or other subjective questions without clear right or wrong answers.

The researchers wanted to see if LLMs would give stable, coherent responses to the same prompt, or if their answers would vary significantly. This is an important question because as LLMs become more advanced and integrated into our lives, we need to understand how reliable and trustworthy they are, especially on topics where there can be significant disagreement among humans.

The researchers designed experiments to test the consistency of LLM responses across multiple rounds of the same value-laden prompts. By analyzing the models' outputs, they aimed to shed light on whether LLMs can maintain a stable position on complex, opinion-based questions, or if they are more like chameleons, shifting their views to match the prompt.

Technical Explanation

The researchers conducted a series of experiments to assess the consistency of large language models (LLMs) when responding to value-laden questions. They collected a set of prompts covering ethical dilemmas, political issues, and other subjective topics, and presented these prompts to several popular LLMs, including GPT-3, Anthropic's InstructGPT, and Cohere's Generate.

For each prompt, the models were asked to generate multiple responses, and the researchers analyzed the consistency of these outputs. They looked for signs of context dependence and instability, where the models' positions or reasoning would shift significantly across repeated prompts.

The researchers also explored the relationship between the models' consistency and the perceived "easiness" or subjectivity of the prompt. They hypothesized that LLMs may be more consistent on straightforward factual questions, but struggle to maintain coherent stances on complex, value-laden issues.

Through their analysis, the researchers aimed to uncover insights into the moral and reasoning capabilities of LLMs, as well as their suitability for tasks that require stable and consistent decision-making.

Critical Analysis

The researchers acknowledge several limitations and caveats in their study. First, the set of prompts used may not be representative of the full spectrum of value-laden questions that LLMs could encounter in real-world applications. The researchers suggest that further research is needed to evaluate consistency across a broader range of topics and scenarios.

Additionally, the researchers note that their analysis focuses on the surface-level consistency of LLM responses, without delving deeper into the underlying reasoning or justifications provided by the models. It is possible that LLMs could exhibit inconsistencies in their logic or ethical frameworks, even if their final outputs appear superficially consistent.

Another potential concern is the influence of biases and training data on the LLMs' responses. The researchers suggest that the models' consistency (or lack thereof) may be partly a reflection of the biases and inconsistencies present in the data used to train them, rather than inherent limitations of the models themselves.

Conclusion

This research provides valuable insights into the consistency and reliability of large language models (LLMs) when it comes to value-laden questions. The findings suggest that while LLMs may be capable of generating coherent and plausible responses, their positions on complex, subjective topics can often be unstable and context-dependent.

These results have important implications for the deployment of LLMs in real-world applications that require stable and trustworthy decision-making, such as in policymaking, healthcare, or legal contexts. The paper highlights the need for further research and development to ensure that LLMs can maintain consistent, principled stances on important ethical and political issues.