How Proficient Are Large Language Models in Formal Languages? An In-Depth Insight for Knowledge Base Question Answering
2401.05777
0
0
💬
Abstract
Knowledge Base Question Answering (KBQA) aims to answer natural language questions based on facts in knowledge bases. A typical approach to KBQA is semantic parsing, which translates a question into an executable logical form in a formal language. Recent works leverage the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) for logical form generation to improve performance. However, although it is validated that LLMs are capable of solving some KBQA problems, there has been little discussion on the differences in LLMs' proficiency in formal languages used in semantic parsing. In this work, we propose to evaluate the understanding and generation ability of LLMs to deal with differently structured logical forms by examining the inter-conversion of natural and formal language through in-context learning of LLMs. Extensive experiments with models of different sizes show that state-of-the-art LLMs can understand formal languages as well as humans, but generating correct logical forms given a few examples remains a challenge. Most importantly, our results also indicate that LLMs exhibit considerable sensitivity. In general, the formal language with a lower formalization level, i.e., the more similar it is to natural language, is more friendly to LLMs.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This research paper explores the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in understanding and generating formal logical forms used in knowledge base question answering (KBQA) tasks.
- KBQA aims to answer natural language questions based on facts in knowledge bases, often using a semantic parsing approach to translate questions into executable logical forms.
- Recent works have leveraged the capabilities of LLMs to improve logical form generation, but there is limited discussion on how LLMs perform with different types of formal languages used in semantic parsing.
Plain English Explanation
The paper investigates how well large language models (LLMs) can work with the formal languages used in knowledge base question answering (KBQA). In KBQA, the goal is to answer natural language questions by finding relevant facts in a knowledge base. A common approach is to translate the question into a logical form, which is a formal, structured representation that a computer can process.
The researchers wanted to see how proficient LLMs are at understanding and generating these logical forms. They tested LLMs of different sizes to see how they performed at converting between natural language questions and the formal logical representations. The key finding is that while LLMs can understand formal languages well, generating the correct logical forms given just a few examples remains challenging.
Importantly, the researchers also found that LLMs tend to do better with formal languages that are more similar to natural language. The more the formal language deviates from how humans naturally express ideas, the more difficulty the LLMs have in working with it. This suggests that the design of the formal language used in KBQA systems is an important consideration for leveraging the capabilities of large language models.
Technical Explanation
The researchers conducted extensive experiments to evaluate how well state-of-the-art LLMs can understand and generate different types of formal logical languages used in semantic parsing for KBQA. They tested models of varying sizes on tasks involving the inter-conversion between natural language and formal logical representations.
The experiments showed that modern LLMs can understand formal languages as well as humans. However, the ability to generate correct logical forms given just a few examples remains a challenge for LLMs. The researchers found that LLMs exhibit considerable sensitivity, where formal languages that are more similar to natural language are more accessible for the models.
This suggests that the design of the formal language used in KBQA systems is an important factor in leveraging the capabilities of large language models. Formal languages that are more de-formalized and closer to natural language expression may be more suitable for LLM-based KBQA approaches.
The findings also align with recent research indicating that LLMs can exhibit surprising deductive competence and can perceive the boundary between knowledge and reasoning in certain tasks. However, generating the correct logical forms from natural language remains a challenge that requires further investigation.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides valuable insights into the capabilities and limitations of LLMs when it comes to understanding and generating formal logical representations used in KBQA systems. The researchers' careful experimental design and thorough analysis offer a nuanced perspective on the performance of LLMs in this domain.
One potential limitation of the study is that it focuses only on the inter-conversion between natural language and formal logical forms, without examining the end-to-end KBQA task performance. Further research could investigate how the findings translate to the overall KBQA performance when integrating LLMs into the full system.
Additionally, the paper does not delve into the specific reasons why LLMs struggle more with formal languages that deviate further from natural language. Exploring the underlying cognitive and architectural factors that contribute to this sensitivity could provide valuable insights for future model development and KBQA system design.
Overall, this research contributes to the growing body of work exploring the strengths and limitations of large language models in handling formal representations and reasoning tasks. The findings highlight the importance of considering the characteristics of the formal languages used in KBQA when leveraging the capabilities of these powerful models.
Conclusion
This paper investigates the ability of large language models (LLMs) to understand and generate formal logical representations used in knowledge base question answering (KBQA) systems. The key findings are:
- LLMs can understand formal languages as well as humans, but generating correct logical forms given just a few examples remains a challenge.
- LLMs exhibit considerable sensitivity, where formal languages that are more similar to natural language are more accessible for the models.
- The design of the formal language used in KBQA systems is an important factor in effectively leveraging the capabilities of large language models.
These insights contribute to our understanding of the strengths and limitations of LLMs in handling formal representations and reasoning tasks. As KBQA systems continue to evolve, incorporating these findings can help guide the development of more effective approaches that harness the power of large language models.
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
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
A Learn-Then-Reason Model Towards Generalization in Knowledge Base Question Answering
Lingxi Zhang, Jing Zhang, Yanling Wang, Cuiping Li, Hong Chen
0
0
Large-scale knowledge bases (KBs) like Freebase and Wikidata house millions of structured knowledge. Knowledge Base Question Answering (KBQA) provides a user-friendly way to access these valuable KBs via asking natural language questions. In order to improve the generalization capabilities of KBQA models, extensive research has embraced a retrieve-then-reason framework to retrieve relevant evidence for logical expression generation. These multi-stage efforts prioritize acquiring external sources but overlook the incorporation of new knowledge into their model parameters. In effect, even advanced language models and retrievers have knowledge boundaries, thereby limiting the generalization capabilities of previous KBQA models. Therefore, this paper develops KBLLaMA, which follows a learn-then-reason framework to inject new KB knowledge into a large language model for flexible end-to-end KBQA. At the core of KBLLaMA, we study (1) how to organize new knowledge about KBQA and (2) how to facilitate the learning of the organized knowledge. Extensive experiments on various KBQA generalization tasks showcase the state-of-the-art performance of KBLLaMA. Especially on the general benchmark GrailQA and domain-specific benchmark Bio-chemical, KBLLaMA respectively derives a performance gain of up to 3.8% and 9.8% compared to the baselines.
6/24/2024
💬
Evaluating the Deductive Competence of Large Language Models
Spencer M. Seals, Valerie L. Shalin
0
0
The development of highly fluent large language models (LLMs) has prompted increased interest in assessing their reasoning and problem-solving capabilities. We investigate whether several LLMs can solve a classic type of deductive reasoning problem from the cognitive science literature. The tested LLMs have limited abilities to solve these problems in their conventional form. We performed follow up experiments to investigate if changes to the presentation format and content improve model performance. We do find performance differences between conditions; however, they do not improve overall performance. Moreover, we find that performance interacts with presentation format and content in unexpected ways that differ from human performance. Overall, our results suggest that LLMs have unique reasoning biases that are only partially predicted from human reasoning performance and the human-generated language corpora that informs them.
4/16/2024
💬
Perception of Knowledge Boundary for Large Language Models through Semi-open-ended Question Answering
Zhihua Wen, Zhiliang Tian, Zexin Jian, Zhen Huang, Pei Ke, Yifu Gao, Minlie Huang, Dongsheng Li
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used for knowledge-seeking yet suffer from hallucinations. The knowledge boundary (KB) of an LLM limits its factual understanding, beyond which it may begin to hallucinate. Investigating the perception of LLMs' KB is crucial for detecting hallucinations and LLMs' reliable generation. Current studies perceive LLMs' KB on questions with a concrete answer (close-ended questions) while paying limited attention to semi-open-ended questions (SoeQ) that correspond to many potential answers. Some researchers achieve it by judging whether the question is answerable or not. However, this paradigm is unsuitable for SoeQ, which are usually partially answerable, containing both answerable and ambiguous (unanswerable) answers. Ambiguous answers are essential for knowledge-seeking, but they may go beyond the KB of LLMs. In this paper, we perceive the LLMs' KB with SoeQ by discovering more ambiguous answers. First, we apply an LLM-based approach to construct SoeQ and obtain answers from a target LLM. Unfortunately, the output probabilities of mainstream black-box LLMs are inaccessible to sample for low-probability ambiguous answers. Therefore, we apply an open-sourced auxiliary model to explore ambiguous answers for the target LLM. We calculate the nearest semantic representation for existing answers to estimate their probabilities, with which we reduce the generation probability of high-probability answers to achieve a more effective generation. Finally, we compare the results from the RAG-based evaluation and LLM self-evaluation to categorize four types of ambiguous answers that are beyond the KB of the target LLM. Following our method, we construct a dataset to perceive the KB for GPT-4. We find that GPT-4 performs poorly on SoeQ and is often unaware of its KB. Besides, our auxiliary model, LLaMA-2-13B, is effective in discovering more ambiguous answers.
5/24/2024