Are Large Language Models a Good Replacement of Taxonomies?
2406.11131
0
0
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate an impressive ability to internalize knowledge and answer natural language questions. Although previous studies validate that LLMs perform well on general knowledge while presenting poor performance on long-tail nuanced knowledge, the community is still doubtful about whether the traditional knowledge graphs should be replaced by LLMs. In this paper, we ask if the schema of knowledge graph (i.e., taxonomy) is made obsolete by LLMs. Intuitively, LLMs should perform well on common taxonomies and at taxonomy levels that are common to people. Unfortunately, there lacks a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates the LLMs over a wide range of taxonomies from common to specialized domains and at levels from root to leaf so that we can draw a confident conclusion. To narrow the research gap, we constructed a novel taxonomy hierarchical structure discovery benchmark named TaxoGlimpse to evaluate the performance of LLMs over taxonomies. TaxoGlimpse covers ten representative taxonomies from common to specialized domains with in-depth experiments of different levels of entities in this taxonomy from root to leaf. Our comprehensive experiments of eighteen state-of-the-art LLMs under three prompting settings validate that LLMs can still not well capture the knowledge of specialized taxonomies and leaf-level entities.
Create account to get full access
Overview
ā¢ This paper explores the potential of large language models (LLMs) as a replacement for traditional taxonomies in various applications. ā¢ The researchers conducted experiments, analyses, and benchmarking to assess the capabilities of LLMs in handling taxonomic tasks. ā¢ The findings provide insights into the strengths and limitations of LLMs compared to traditional taxonomies, offering a nuanced perspective on the suitability of LLMs as a replacement in different contexts.
Plain English Explanation
Taxonomies are hierarchical systems used to organize and classify information, such as the classification of living organisms. Traditional taxonomies rely on expert knowledge and manual curation to build these classification systems. However, with the rapid advancements in large language models, researchers are exploring the potential of these AI models as a replacement for traditional taxonomies.
In this study, the researchers investigate whether LLMs can effectively perform taxonomic tasks, such as identifying relationships between concepts and organizing information into hierarchical structures. They conduct a series of experiments, analyses, and benchmark tests to assess the capabilities of LLMs in this domain.
The findings suggest that LLMs can indeed exhibit some taxonomic capabilities, but they also have limitations compared to traditional taxonomies. LLMs may struggle with certain tasks, such as maintaining consistency and coherence across a large knowledge base, or accurately capturing nuanced relationships between concepts.
The researchers provide a nuanced perspective, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of LLMs in taxonomic applications. They suggest that LLMs may be more suitable as a complementary tool to traditional taxonomies, rather than a complete replacement, in certain contexts.
Technical Explanation
The researchers designed a comprehensive benchmark to evaluate the taxonomic capabilities of LLMs. They created a set of questions and tasks that assess the models' ability to identify hierarchical relationships, classify concepts, and organize information in a taxonomic manner.
The benchmark includes a diverse range of topics, covering both general and specialized domains, to ensure a thorough evaluation. The researchers employed several well-known LLMs, such as GPT-3, BERT, and T5, to participate in the benchmark and compare their performance.
The results of the benchmark reveal both the strengths and limitations of LLMs in taxonomic tasks. LLMs demonstrate a strong ability to identify high-level relationships between concepts and can sometimes organize information in a taxonomic structure. However, they also exhibit challenges in maintaining consistency and coherence across a large knowledge base, as well as accurately capturing nuanced relationships between specific entities.
The researchers further analyze the factors that contribute to the performance of LLMs in taxonomic tasks, such as the model architecture, training data, and task-specific fine-tuning. They also explore the potential of incorporating external knowledge sources, such as knowledge graphs, to enhance the taxonomic capabilities of LLMs.
The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the strengths and limitations of LLMs in taxonomic applications, offering a nuanced perspective on their suitability as a replacement for traditional taxonomies. The researchers suggest that LLMs may be most effective as a complementary tool, working in conjunction with human experts and traditional taxonomies, rather than as a standalone replacement.
Critical Analysis
The researchers acknowledge several limitations and areas for further research in their study. One key limitation is the potential bias and inconsistencies inherent in the training data used to develop the LLMs, which may impact their performance on taxonomic tasks.
Additionally, the researchers note that the benchmark they designed, while comprehensive, may not capture the full range of taxonomic tasks and challenges encountered in real-world applications. There may be specific use cases or domains where LLMs excel or struggle more than the results suggest.
The researchers also highlight the need for further exploration of techniques to improve the taxonomic capabilities of LLMs, such as efficient training methods or targeted fine-tuning. Incorporating external knowledge sources, like knowledge graphs, may also be a promising avenue for enhancing the taxonomic understanding of LLMs.
Overall, the researchers maintain a balanced and objective perspective, acknowledging the potential of LLMs while also cautioning against simplistic comparisons or assumptions about their suitability as a complete replacement for traditional taxonomies. The study serves as a valuable contribution to the ongoing discussion around the role of LLMs in taxonomic applications.
Conclusion
This paper provides a comprehensive assessment of the taxonomic capabilities of large language models, exploring their potential as a replacement for traditional taxonomies. The researchers' experiments, analyses, and benchmark testing offer a nuanced perspective, highlighting both the strengths and limitations of LLMs in this domain.
While LLMs demonstrate some taxonomic abilities, such as identifying high-level relationships between concepts, they also face challenges in maintaining consistency and capturing nuanced relationships across large knowledge bases. The researchers suggest that LLMs may be most effective as a complementary tool, working in conjunction with human experts and traditional taxonomies, rather than as a standalone replacement.
The findings of this study contribute to the ongoing discussion around the role of advanced AI models, like large language models, in knowledge organization and classification tasks. As the field continues to evolve, further research and exploration will be crucial in determining the most effective and appropriate use of LLMs in taxonomic applications.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
š¬
Head-to-Tail: How Knowledgeable are Large Language Models (LLMs)? A.K.A. Will LLMs Replace Knowledge Graphs?
Kai Sun, Yifan Ethan Xu, Hanwen Zha, Yue Liu, Xin Luna Dong
0
0
Since the recent prosperity of Large Language Models (LLMs), there have been interleaved discussions regarding how to reduce hallucinations from LLM responses, how to increase the factuality of LLMs, and whether Knowledge Graphs (KGs), which store the world knowledge in a symbolic form, will be replaced with LLMs. In this paper, we try to answer these questions from a new angle: How knowledgeable are LLMs? To answer this question, we constructed Head-to-Tail, a benchmark that consists of 18K question-answer (QA) pairs regarding head, torso, and tail facts in terms of popularity. We designed an automated evaluation method and a set of metrics that closely approximate the knowledge an LLM confidently internalizes. Through a comprehensive evaluation of 16 publicly available LLMs, we show that existing LLMs are still far from being perfect in terms of their grasp of factual knowledge, especially for facts of torso-to-tail entities.
4/4/2024
A Survey of Large Language Models for Graphs
Xubin Ren, Jiabin Tang, Dawei Yin, Nitesh Chawla, Chao Huang
0
0
Graphs are an essential data structure utilized to represent relationships in real-world scenarios. Prior research has established that Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) deliver impressive outcomes in graph-centric tasks, such as link prediction and node classification. Despite these advancements, challenges like data sparsity and limited generalization capabilities continue to persist. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained attention in natural language processing. They excel in language comprehension and summarization. Integrating LLMs with graph learning techniques has attracted interest as a way to enhance performance in graph learning tasks. In this survey, we conduct an in-depth review of the latest state-of-the-art LLMs applied in graph learning and introduce a novel taxonomy to categorize existing methods based on their framework design. We detail four unique designs: i) GNNs as Prefix, ii) LLMs as Prefix, iii) LLMs-Graphs Integration, and iv) LLMs-Only, highlighting key methodologies within each category. We explore the strengths and limitations of each framework, and emphasize potential avenues for future research, including overcoming current integration challenges between LLMs and graph learning techniques, and venturing into new application areas. This survey aims to serve as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners eager to leverage large language models in graph learning, and to inspire continued progress in this dynamic field. We consistently maintain the related open-source materials at url{https://github.com/HKUDS/Awesome-LLM4Graph-Papers}.
6/26/2024
1+1>2: Can Large Language Models Serve as Cross-Lingual Knowledge Aggregators?
Yue Huang, Chenrui Fan, Yuan Li, Siyuan Wu, Tianyi Zhou, Xiangliang Zhang, Lichao Sun
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have garnered significant attention due to their remarkable ability to process information across various languages. Despite their capabilities, they exhibit inconsistencies in handling identical queries in different languages, presenting challenges for further advancement. This paper introduces a method to enhance the multilingual performance of LLMs by aggregating knowledge from diverse languages. This approach incorporates a low-resource knowledge detector specific to a language, a language selection process, and mechanisms for answer replacement and integration. Our experiments demonstrate notable performance improvements, particularly in reducing language performance disparity. An ablation study confirms that each component of our method significantly contributes to these enhancements. This research highlights the inherent potential of LLMs to harmonize multilingual capabilities and offers valuable insights for further exploration.
6/24/2024
Counter-intuitive: Large Language Models Can Better Understand Knowledge Graphs Than We Thought
Xinbang Dai, Yuncheng Hua, Tongtong Wu, Yang Sheng, Qiu Ji, Guilin Qi
0
0
As the parameter scale of large language models (LLMs) grows, jointly training knowledge graph (KG) embeddings with model parameters to enhance LLM capabilities becomes increasingly costly. Consequently, the community has shown interest in developing prompt strategies that effectively integrate KG information into LLMs. However, the format for incorporating KGs into LLMs lacks standardization; for instance, KGs can be transformed into linearized triples or natural language (NL) text. Current prompting methods often rely on a trial-and-error approach, leaving researchers with an incomplete understanding of which KG input format best facilitates LLM comprehension of KG content. To elucidate this, we design a series of experiments to explore LLMs' understanding of different KG input formats within the context of prompt engineering. Our analysis examines both literal and attention distribution levels. Through extensive experiments, we indicate a counter-intuitive phenomenon: when addressing fact-related questions, unordered linearized triples are more effective for LLMs' understanding of KGs compared to fluent NL text. Furthermore, noisy, incomplete, or marginally relevant subgraphs can still enhance LLM performance. Finally, different LLMs have distinct preferences for different formats of organizing unordered triples.
6/18/2024