NEO-BENCH: Evaluating Robustness of Large Language Models with Neologisms

Overview

• Large Language Models (LLMs) can struggle with newer language changes like neologisms (new words)
• Researchers created a dataset of recent English neologisms and used it to analyze how LLM performance degrades when encountering these new words
• Their findings show significant performance drops in tasks like machine translation, motivating the creation of a benchmark to test LLM generalization to neologisms

Plain English Explanation

As language evolves over time, the data used to train Large Language Models (LLMs) can become outdated. This can cause a "temporal drift" where the model's performance degrades when encountering newer language, such as neologisms - new word forms that emerge.

The researchers tackled this problem by first creating a diverse dataset of recent English neologisms using various collection methods. They then analyzed how the introduction of these new words impacts LLM performance, finding that machine translation accuracy can drop by nearly 50% when a single neologism is present.

Motivated by these results, the researchers constructed a benchmark to specifically evaluate how well LLMs can generalize and understand tasks involving neologisms. They found that models with more up-to-date training data tended to perform better, indicating that addressing temporal drift is an important challenge for LLMs.

Additionally, the researchers observed that LLMs are affected differently by neologisms depending on their linguistic origins, suggesting that these new words pose a complex problem for static language models to handle.

Technical Explanation

The researchers first compiled a diverse dataset of recent English neologisms using a variety of popular collection methods. They then conducted experiments to analyze the impact of these new words on LLM performance.

In their machine translation experiment, the researchers compared model performance on sentences containing neologisms versus near-identical sentences with existing substitute words. They found that introducing a single neologism can reduce translation quality by nearly 50%.

Motivated by these results, the researchers constructed a benchmark to more comprehensively evaluate LLMs' ability to generalize to neologisms. This included tasks like phonological skill assessment, efficiency testing, and culturally-nuanced language understanding.

Their results showed that models with later knowledge cutoff dates tended to have lower perplexities and better performance on these downstream tasks, indicating that addressing temporal drift is crucial. They also observed that LLMs are affected differently by neologisms based on their linguistic origins, suggesting that these new words pose a complex challenge for static language models.

Critical Analysis

The researchers acknowledge several limitations in their work. First, their neologism dataset, while diverse, may not be fully comprehensive. Additionally, the benchmark they created, while valuable, may not cover all aspects of language change and neologism understanding.

One could also argue that the researchers' focus on performance drops in specific tasks, while informative, does not fully capture the real-world implications of LLMs struggling with temporal drift and neologisms. The impact on downstream applications and user experiences may be more complex and nuanced.

Furthermore, the researchers do not delve deeply into potential solutions to address the challenges of temporal drift and neologism generalization. While they suggest that models with more up-to-date training data perform better, they do not explore other possible approaches, such as dynamic language model adaptation or specialized neologism handling mechanisms.

Conclusion

This research highlights an important and understudied challenge facing large language models: their performance can significantly degrade when encountering newer language changes like neologisms. By creating a dataset of recent English neologisms and using it to analyze LLM behavior, the researchers have made a valuable contribution to the field.

Their findings motivate the need for more robust benchmarks and evaluation techniques to assess LLMs' ability to generalize to evolving language. Addressing temporal drift and neologism understanding will be crucial for ensuring the long-term effectiveness and relevance of these powerful language models.