From Data to Commonsense Reasoning: The Use of Large Language Models for Explainable AI

Read original: arXiv:2407.03778 - Published 7/8/2024 by Stefanie Krause, Frieder Stolzenburg
Total Score

0

From Data to Commonsense Reasoning: The Use of Large Language Models for Explainable AI

Sign in to get full access

or

If you already have an account, we'll log you in

Overview

  • Explores the use of large language models (LLMs) for explainable AI (XAI)
  • Discusses the challenges of moving from data-driven approaches to commonsense reasoning
  • Highlights the potential of LLMs to bridge the gap between data and higher-level understanding

Plain English Explanation

Large language models (LLMs) are artificial intelligence systems that have been trained on vast amounts of text data, allowing them to understand and generate human-like language. This paper explores how these powerful models can be used to create "explainable AI" (XAI) - systems that can explain their decision-making process in a way that humans can understand.

The key challenge is moving from data-driven approaches, where AI systems simply match patterns in data, to commonsense reasoning - the ability to understand the world in a more human-like way. LLMs hold promise in bridging this gap, as their training on large text corpora can endow them with a deeper grasp of language, concepts, and real-world knowledge.

By leveraging LLMs, the researchers aim to develop AI systems that can not only make accurate predictions, but also provide clear explanations for their outputs. This could lead to more transparent and trustworthy AI, where users can better understand how the system arrived at its conclusions.

The paper discusses the potential of LLMs to serve as a foundation for XAI, opening up new avenues for AI systems to communicate their reasoning in a way that is accessible to human users. This could have important implications for fields like healthcare, finance, and policymaking, where the ability to explain AI decisions is crucial.

Technical Explanation

The paper explores the use of large language models (LLMs) as a foundation for explainable AI (XAI) systems. LLMs are AI models that have been trained on vast amounts of text data, giving them a deep understanding of language, concepts, and commonsense reasoning.

The researchers argue that moving from data-driven AI approaches to more human-like commonsense reasoning is a key challenge. LLMs, with their broad knowledge and language capabilities, hold promise in bridging this gap and enabling the development of XAI systems.

The paper discusses several ways in which LLMs could be leveraged for XAI:

  1. Generating Explanations: LLMs could be used to generate natural language explanations for an AI system's outputs, allowing users to better understand the reasoning behind the system's decisions.

  2. Probing Commonsense Knowledge: By probing the knowledge and reasoning capabilities of LLMs, researchers can gain insights into how these models represent and reason about the world, which could inform the development of more explainable AI systems.

  3. Causal Reasoning: LLMs may be able to uncover causal relationships in data, which could then be used to provide more meaningful explanations for an AI system's outputs.

  4. Interactive Explanations: LLMs could enable AI systems to engage in a dialogue with users, allowing for more interactive and iterative explanations of the system's decision-making process.

The paper highlights the potential of LLMs to serve as a foundation for XAI, opening up new avenues for AI systems to communicate their reasoning in a way that is accessible to human users. This could have important implications for various domains, where the ability to explain AI decisions is crucial for building trust and accountability.

Critical Analysis

The paper presents a compelling case for the use of large language models (LLMs) in the development of explainable AI (XAI) systems. However, the authors acknowledge several caveats and limitations that should be considered:

  1. Limitation of Current LLMs: While LLMs have impressive language and reasoning capabilities, they are still limited in their ability to truly understand the world in a human-like way. Bridging the gap between data-driven patterns and commonsense reasoning remains a significant challenge.

  2. Bias and Fairness: LLMs, like any AI system, can reflect and amplify biases present in their training data. Ensuring the fairness and ethical behavior of LLM-based XAI systems will be an important area of research.

  3. Robustness and Reliability: The paper notes that LLM-based XAI systems may be vulnerable to adversarial attacks or other forms of instability, which could undermine their reliability and trustworthiness.

  4. Scalability and Efficiency: Deploying LLM-based XAI systems at scale may pose challenges in terms of computational resources and real-time performance, which the paper does not fully address.

Despite these limitations, the paper presents a compelling vision for the role of LLMs in XAI. Continued research and innovation in this area could lead to more transparent and trustworthy AI systems, with important implications for a wide range of applications.

Conclusion

This paper explores the potential of large language models (LLMs) to serve as a foundation for the development of explainable AI (XAI) systems. By leveraging the broad knowledge and language capabilities of LLMs, the researchers aim to bridge the gap between data-driven AI approaches and more human-like commonsense reasoning.

The paper outlines several ways in which LLMs could enable the creation of XAI systems, such as generating natural language explanations, probing commonsense knowledge, uncovering causal relationships, and enabling interactive explanations. This could lead to more transparent and trustworthy AI systems, with important implications for fields like healthcare, finance, and policymaking.

While the paper acknowledges the limitations of current LLMs and the challenges in achieving true commonsense reasoning, the potential of this approach is compelling. Continued research and innovation in this area could unlock new possibilities for AI systems to communicate their decision-making processes in a way that is accessible and meaningful to human users.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on ๐• โ†’

Related Papers

From Data to Commonsense Reasoning: The Use of Large Language Models for Explainable AI
Total Score

0

From Data to Commonsense Reasoning: The Use of Large Language Models for Explainable AI

Stefanie Krause, Frieder Stolzenburg

Commonsense reasoning is a difficult task for a computer, but a critical skill for an artificial intelligence (AI). It can enhance the explainability of AI models by enabling them to provide intuitive and human-like explanations for their decisions. This is necessary in many areas especially in question answering (QA), which is one of the most important tasks of natural language processing (NLP). Over time, a multitude of methods have emerged for solving commonsense reasoning problems such as knowledge-based approaches using formal logic or linguistic analysis. In this paper, we investigate the effectiveness of large language models (LLMs) on different QA tasks with a focus on their abilities in reasoning and explainability. We study three LLMs: GPT-3.5, Gemma and Llama 3. We further evaluate the LLM results by means of a questionnaire. We demonstrate the ability of LLMs to reason with commonsense as the models outperform humans on different datasets. While GPT-3.5's accuracy ranges from 56% to 93% on various QA benchmarks, Llama 3 achieved a mean accuracy of 90% on all eleven datasets. Thereby Llama 3 is outperforming humans on all datasets with an average 21% higher accuracy over ten datasets. Furthermore, we can appraise that, in the sense of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), GPT-3.5 provides good explanations for its decisions. Our questionnaire revealed that 66% of participants rated GPT-3.5's explanations as either good or excellent. Taken together, these findings enrich our understanding of current LLMs and pave the way for future investigations of reasoning and explainability.

Read more

7/8/2024

๐Ÿ’ฌ

Total Score

0

A Perspective on Large Language Models, Intelligent Machines, and Knowledge Acquisition

Vladimir Cherkassky, Eng Hock Lee

Large Language Models (LLMs) are known for their remarkable ability to generate synthesized 'knowledge', such as text documents, music, images, etc. However, there is a huge gap between LLM's and human capabilities for understanding abstract concepts and reasoning. We discuss these issues in a larger philosophical context of human knowledge acquisition and the Turing test. In addition, we illustrate the limitations of LLMs by analyzing GPT-4 responses to questions ranging from science and math to common sense reasoning. These examples show that GPT-4 can often imitate human reasoning, even though it lacks understanding. However, LLM responses are synthesized from a large LLM model trained on all available data. In contrast, human understanding is based on a small number of abstract concepts. Based on this distinction, we discuss the impact of LLMs on acquisition of human knowledge and education.

Read more

8/14/2024

๐Ÿ’ฌ

Total Score

0

Evaluating Consistency and Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models

Yash Saxena, Sarthak Chopra, Arunendra Mani Tripathi

Large Language Models (LLMs) are extensively used today across various sectors, including academia, research, business, and finance, for tasks such as text generation, summarization, and translation. Despite their widespread adoption, these models often produce incorrect and misleading information, exhibiting a tendency to hallucinate. This behavior can be attributed to several factors, with consistency and reasoning capabilities being significant contributors. LLMs frequently lack the ability to generate explanations and engage in coherent reasoning, leading to inaccurate responses. Moreover, they exhibit inconsistencies in their outputs. This paper aims to evaluate and compare the consistency and reasoning capabilities of both public and proprietary LLMs. The experiments utilize the Boolq dataset as the ground truth, comprising questions, answers, and corresponding explanations. Queries from the dataset are presented as prompts to the LLMs, and the generated responses are evaluated against the ground truth answers. Additionally, explanations are generated to assess the models' reasoning abilities. Consistency is evaluated by repeatedly presenting the same query to the models and observing for variations in their responses. For measuring reasoning capabilities, the generated explanations are compared to the ground truth explanations using metrics such as BERT, BLEU, and F-1 scores. The findings reveal that proprietary models generally outperform public models in terms of both consistency and reasoning capabilities. However, even when presented with basic general knowledge questions, none of the models achieved a score of 90% in both consistency and reasoning. This study underscores the direct correlation between consistency and reasoning abilities in LLMs and highlights the inherent reasoning challenges present in current language models.

Read more

4/26/2024

๐Ÿงช

Total Score

1

Testing AI on language comprehension tasks reveals insensitivity to underlying meaning

Vittoria Dentella, Fritz Guenther, Elliot Murphy, Gary Marcus, Evelina Leivada

Large Language Models (LLMs) are recruited in applications that span from clinical assistance and legal support to question answering and education. Their success in specialized tasks has led to the claim that they possess human-like linguistic capabilities related to compositional understanding and reasoning. Yet, reverse-engineering is bound by Moravec's Paradox, according to which easy skills are hard. We systematically assess 7 state-of-the-art models on a novel benchmark. Models answered a series of comprehension questions, each prompted multiple times in two settings, permitting one-word or open-length replies. Each question targets a short text featuring high-frequency linguistic constructions. To establish a baseline for achieving human-like performance, we tested 400 humans on the same prompts. Based on a dataset of n=26,680 datapoints, we discovered that LLMs perform at chance accuracy and waver considerably in their answers. Quantitatively, the tested models are outperformed by humans, and qualitatively their answers showcase distinctly non-human errors in language understanding. We interpret this evidence as suggesting that, despite their usefulness in various tasks, current AI models fall short of understanding language in a way that matches humans, and we argue that this may be due to their lack of a compositional operator for regulating grammatical and semantic information.

Read more

7/10/2024