Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

ContraDoc: Understanding Self-Contradictions in Documents with Large Language Models

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

arxiv 2311.09182 v2 pith:ZMBMJGT4 submitted 2023-11-15 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords self-contradictionscontradocdatasetdocumentscapabilitiesdocumentgpt4language
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In recent times, large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance on various document-level tasks such as document classification, summarization, and question-answering. However, research on understanding their capabilities on the task of self-contradictions in long documents has been very limited. In this work, we introduce ContraDoc, the first human-annotated dataset to study self-contradictions in long documents across multiple domains, varying document lengths, self-contradictions types, and scope. We then analyze the current capabilities of four state-of-the-art open-source and commercially available LLMs: GPT3.5, GPT4, PaLM2, and LLaMAv2 on this dataset. While GPT4 performs the best and can outperform humans on this task, we find that it is still unreliable and struggles with self-contradictions that require more nuance and context. We release the dataset and all the code associated with the experiments (https://github.com/ddhruvkr/CONTRADOC).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Prompting in the Wild: An Empirical Study of Prompt Evolution in Software Repositories

    cs.SE 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    An empirical study of 1,262 prompt changes across 243 GitHub repositories shows that developers mainly add and modify prompt components during feature development, rarely document the changes, and sometimes introduce ...

Pith tools