Interactive Analysis of LLMs using Meaningful Counterfactuals
2405.00708
0
0
🏋️
Abstract
Counterfactual examples are useful for exploring the decision boundaries of machine learning models and determining feature attributions. How can we apply counterfactual-based methods to analyze and explain LLMs? We identify the following key challenges. First, the generated textual counterfactuals should be meaningful and readable to users and thus can be mentally compared to draw conclusions. Second, to make the solution scalable to long-form text, users should be equipped with tools to create batches of counterfactuals from perturbations at various granularity levels and interactively analyze the results. In this paper, we tackle the above challenges and contribute 1) a novel algorithm for generating batches of complete and meaningful textual counterfactuals by removing and replacing text segments in different granularities, and 2) LLM Analyzer, an interactive visualization tool to help users understand an LLM's behaviors by interactively inspecting and aggregating meaningful counterfactuals. We evaluate the proposed algorithm by the grammatical correctness of its generated counterfactuals using 1,000 samples from medical, legal, finance, education, and news datasets. In our experiments, 97.2% of the counterfactuals are grammatically correct. Through a use case, user studies, and feedback from experts, we demonstrate the usefulness and usability of the proposed interactive visualization tool.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Counterfactual examples can help explore the decision boundaries of machine learning models and determine feature attributions.
- The paper identifies two key challenges in applying counterfactual-based methods to analyze and explain large language models (LLMs):
- The generated textual counterfactuals must be meaningful and readable for users to mentally compare.
- To make the solution scalable to long-form text, users should have tools to create batches of counterfactuals from perturbations at various levels and interactively analyze the results.
Plain English Explanation
Counterfactual examples are like "what-if" scenarios that can reveal how machine learning models make decisions. They're useful for understanding what features a model is focusing on and where its decision boundaries lie.
The researchers in this paper wanted to find a way to apply these counterfactual techniques to large language models (LLMs), which are powerful AI systems that can generate human-like text. However, they identified two main challenges:
-
Meaningful Counterfactuals: The textual counterfactuals generated need to be coherent and sensible, so that humans can easily compare them to the original text and draw conclusions about the model's behavior.
-
Scalability: When working with long passages of text, it's important to have tools that allow users to quickly create many counterfactual examples by modifying the text at different levels (words, sentences, paragraphs, etc.). This makes it easier to explore the model's responses in an interactive way.
To address these challenges, the researchers developed a new algorithm for generating batches of meaningful textual counterfactuals, and also created an interactive visualization tool called the "LLM Analyzer" to help users explore the model's behaviors.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a novel algorithm for generating batches of textual counterfactuals by removing and replacing different segments of the input text. This allows for counterfactuals to be generated at various levels of granularity (words, sentences, paragraphs, etc.).
The researchers evaluated the grammatical correctness of the generated counterfactuals using 1,000 samples from diverse datasets (medical, legal, finance, education, news). They found that 97.2% of the counterfactuals were grammatically correct, demonstrating the effectiveness of their approach.
Additionally, the paper introduces the "LLM Analyzer," an interactive visualization tool that enables users to quickly create and inspect batches of counterfactuals. This helps users understand an LLM's behaviors by allowing them to interactively explore the model's responses to different textual perturbations.
The usefulness and usability of the LLM Analyzer tool were validated through a use case, user studies, and feedback from domain experts.
Critical Analysis
The paper addresses an important challenge in explainable AI: understanding the decision-making of large language models. By generating meaningful textual counterfactuals and providing interactive visualization tools, the researchers have taken a step towards making these complex models more interpretable.
However, the paper acknowledges some limitations. For example, the evaluation of grammatical correctness does not necessarily guarantee that the counterfactuals are semantically or pragmatically meaningful. Additionally, the paper does not address potential biases or fairness issues that may arise from the generated counterfactuals.
Further research could explore ways to ensure the semantic and pragmatic coherence of the counterfactuals, as well as investigate the potential for counterfactual-based methods to uncover biases in LLMs. Integrating these techniques with other explainability approaches, such as those proposed in related papers, could also lead to more comprehensive model understanding.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel approach for generating meaningful textual counterfactuals and an interactive visualization tool to help users understand the behaviors of large language models. By addressing key challenges in scalability and coherence, the researchers have made progress in applying counterfactual-based methods to these powerful AI systems.
The ability to interactively explore model responses to textual perturbations can lead to important insights about the models' decision-making processes and potentially uncover biases or other issues. As LLMs become increasingly influential in a wide range of applications, tools like the LLM Analyzer can play a crucial role in making these models more transparent and accountable.
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
LLMs for Generating and Evaluating Counterfactuals: A Comprehensive Study
Van Bach Nguyen, Paul Youssef, Jorg Schlotterer, Christin Seifert
0
0
As NLP models become more complex, understanding their decisions becomes more crucial. Counterfactuals (CFs), where minimal changes to inputs flip a model's prediction, offer a way to explain these models. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance in NLP tasks, their efficacy in generating high-quality CFs remains uncertain. This work fills this gap by investigating how well LLMs generate CFs for two NLU tasks. We conduct a comprehensive comparison of several common LLMs, and evaluate their CFs, assessing both intrinsic metrics, and the impact of these CFs on data augmentation. Moreover, we analyze differences between human and LLM-generated CFs, providing insights for future research directions. Our results show that LLMs generate fluent CFs, but struggle to keep the induced changes minimal. Generating CFs for Sentiment Analysis (SA) is less challenging than NLI where LLMs show weaknesses in generating CFs that flip the original label. This also reflects on the data augmentation performance, where we observe a large gap between augmenting with human and LLMs CFs. Furthermore, we evaluate LLMs' ability to assess CFs in a mislabelled data setting, and show that they have a strong bias towards agreeing with the provided labels. GPT4 is more robust against this bias and its scores correlate well with automatic metrics. Our findings reveal several limitations and point to potential future work directions.
5/3/2024
🛸
Zero-shot LLM-guided Counterfactual Generation for Text
Amrita Bhattacharjee, Raha Moraffah, Joshua Garland, Huan Liu
0
0
Counterfactual examples are frequently used for model development and evaluation in many natural language processing (NLP) tasks. Although methods for automated counterfactual generation have been explored, such methods depend on models such as pre-trained language models that are then fine-tuned on auxiliary, often task-specific datasets. Collecting and annotating such datasets for counterfactual generation is labor intensive and therefore, infeasible in practice. Therefore, in this work, we focus on a novel problem setting: textit{zero-shot counterfactual generation}. To this end, we propose a structured way to utilize large language models (LLMs) as general purpose counterfactual example generators. We hypothesize that the instruction-following and textual understanding capabilities of recent LLMs can be effectively leveraged for generating high quality counterfactuals in a zero-shot manner, without requiring any training or fine-tuning. Through comprehensive experiments on various downstream tasks in natural language processing (NLP), we demonstrate the efficacy of LLMs as zero-shot counterfactual generators in evaluating and explaining black-box NLP models.
5/9/2024
CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models
Yinya Huang, Ruixin Hong, Hongming Zhang, Wei Shao, Zhicheng Yang, Dong Yu, Changshui Zhang, Xiaodan Liang, Linqi Song
0
0
In this study, we delve into the realm of counterfactual reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). Our primary objective is to cultivate the counterfactual thought processes within LLMs and rigorously assess these processes for their validity. Specifically, we introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark. In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship. To effectively evaluate a generation model's counterfactual capabilities, we propose an innovative evaluation metric, the decomposed Self-Evaluation Score (SES) to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs instead of modeling the task as a multiple-choice problem. Analysis shows that the proposed automatic metric aligns well with human preference. Our experimental results show that while LLMs demonstrate a notable capacity for logical counterfactual thinking, there remains a discernible gap between their current abilities and human performance. Code and data are available at https://github.com/Eleanor-H/CLOMO.
6/10/2024
🔮
Explaining Text Classifiers with Counterfactual Representations
Pirmin Lemberger, Antoine Saillenfest
0
0
One well motivated explanation method for classifiers leverages counterfactuals which are hypothetical events identical to real observations in all aspects except for one categorical feature. Constructing such counterfactual poses specific challenges for texts, however, as some attribute values may not necessarily align with plausible real-world events. In this paper we propose a simple method for generating counterfactuals by intervening in the space of text representations which bypasses this limitation. We argue that our interventions are minimally disruptive and that they are theoretically sound as they align with counterfactuals as defined in Pearl's causal inference framework. To validate our method, we conducted experiments first on a synthetic dataset and then on a realistic dataset of counterfactuals. This allows for a direct comparison between classifier predictions based on ground truth counterfactuals - obtained through explicit text interventions - and our counterfactuals, derived through interventions in the representation space. Eventually, we study a real world scenario where our counterfactuals can be leveraged both for explaining a classifier and for bias mitigation.
4/30/2024