Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Robust Pronoun Fidelity with English LLMs: Are they Reasoning, Repeating, or Just Biased?

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 2404.03134 v3 pith:77NKS3VG submitted 2024-04-04 cs.CL cs.CY

Robust Pronoun Fidelity with English LLMs: Are they Reasoning, Repeating, or Just Biased?

classification cs.CL cs.CY
keywords pronounfidelityrobustmodeltheyaccuracyenglishevaluate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Robust, faithful and harm-free pronoun use for individuals is an important goal for language model development as their use increases, but prior work tends to study only one or two of these characteristics at a time. To measure progress towards the combined goal, we introduce the task of pronoun fidelity: given a context introducing a co-referring entity and pronoun, the task is to reuse the correct pronoun later. We present RUFF, a carefully-designed dataset of over 5 million instances to measure robust pronoun fidelity in English, and we evaluate 37 model variants from nine popular families, across architectures (encoder-only, decoder-only and encoder-decoder) and scales (11M-70B parameters). When an individual is introduced with a pronoun, models can mostly faithfully reuse this pronoun in the next sentence, but they are significantly worse with she/her/her, singular they and neopronouns. Moreover, models are easily distracted by non-adversarial sentences discussing other people; even one sentence with a distractor pronoun causes accuracy to drop on average by 34 percentage points. Our results show that pronoun fidelity is not robust, in a simple, naturalistic setting where humans achieve nearly 100% accuracy. We encourage researchers to bridge the gaps we find and to carefully evaluate reasoning in settings where superficial repetition might inflate perceptions of model performance.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Holmes: A Benchmark to Assess the Linguistic Competence of Language Models

    cs.CL 2024-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Holmes is a probing benchmark compiling over 200 datasets from 270 studies to evaluate linguistic competence across syntax, morphology, semantics, reasoning, and discourse in more than 50 language models.