REVIEW 3 cited by
Dialectical language model evaluation: An initial appraisal of the commonsense spatial reasoning abilities of LLMs
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Language models have become very popular recently and many claims have been made about their abilities, including for commonsense reasoning. Given the increasingly better results of current language models on previous static benchmarks for commonsense reasoning, we explore an alternative dialectical evaluation. The goal of this kind of evaluation is not to obtain an aggregate performance value but to find failures and map the boundaries of the system. Dialoguing with the system gives the opportunity to check for consistency and get more reassurance of these boundaries beyond anecdotal evidence. In this paper we conduct some qualitative investigations of this kind of evaluation for the particular case of spatial reasoning (which is a fundamental aspect of commonsense reasoning). We conclude with some suggestions for future work both to improve the capabilities of language models and to systematise this kind of dialectical evaluation.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Foundation Models for Geospatial Reasoning: Assessing Capabilities of Large Language Models in Understanding Geometries and Topological Spatial Relations
Large language models, especially GPT-4 with few-shot prompts, can classify topological spatial relations between WKT-encoded geometries with roughly 0.6 to 0.66 accuracy, though errors cluster near conceptually simil...
-
MazeEval: A Benchmark for Testing Sequential Decision-Making in Language Models
A new maze-navigation benchmark claims LLM spatial reasoning is language-dependent, with O3 exceptional and other models failing by looping, but the looping result is an artifact of the termination rule.
-
From Reasoning to Generalization: Knowledge-Augmented LLMs for ARC Benchmark
A staged knowledge-prompting method (KAAR) improves LLM test accuracy on ARC by about 5 absolute points over repeated-sampling plan-guided code generation, reaching 35% with GPT-o3-mini.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.