Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Recovering Mental Representations from Large Language Models with Markov Chain Monte Carlo

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 2401.16657 v1 pith:LBHGR6SK submitted 2024-01-30 cs.AI cs.CL

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

Simulating sampling algorithms with people has proven a useful method for efficiently probing and understanding their mental representations. We propose that the same methods can be used to study the representations of Large Language Models (LLMs). While one can always directly prompt either humans or LLMs to disclose their mental representations introspectively, we show that increased efficiency can be achieved by using LLMs as elements of a sampling algorithm. We explore the extent to which we recover human-like representations when LLMs are interrogated with Direct Sampling and Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). We found a significant increase in efficiency and performance using adaptive sampling algorithms based on MCMC. We also highlight the potential of our method to yield a more general method of conducting Bayesian inference \textit{with} LLMs.

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. Do Language Models Have Bayesian Brains? Distinguishing Stochastic and Deterministic Decision Patterns within Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Large language models can behave deterministically at standard settings, so iterated-learning priors may be artifacts, and varying the starting point can reveal which models are truly sampling.

Pith tools