Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Are Large Language Models Temporally Grounded?

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 2311.08398 v2 pith:IRTQ464O submitted 2023-11-14 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords llmstemporaleventsfindmodelavailablegroundedinstruction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Are Large language models (LLMs) temporally grounded? Since LLMs cannot perceive and interact with the environment, it is impossible to answer this question directly. Instead, we provide LLMs with textual narratives and probe them with respect to their common-sense knowledge of the structure and duration of events, their ability to order events along a timeline, and self-consistency within their temporal model (e.g., temporal relations such as after and before are mutually exclusive for any pair of events). We evaluate state-of-the-art LLMs (such as LLaMA 2 and GPT-4) on three tasks reflecting these abilities. Generally, we find that LLMs lag significantly behind both human performance as well as small-scale, specialised LMs. In-context learning, instruction tuning, and chain-of-thought prompting reduce this gap only to a limited degree. Crucially, LLMs struggle the most with self-consistency, displaying incoherent behaviour in at least 27.23% of their predictions. Contrary to expectations, we also find that scaling the model size does not guarantee positive gains in performance. To explain these results, we study the sources from which LLMs may gather temporal information: we find that sentence ordering in unlabelled texts, available during pre-training, is only weakly correlated with event ordering. Moreover, public instruction tuning mixtures contain few temporal tasks. Hence, we conclude that current LLMs lack a consistent temporal model of textual narratives. Code, datasets, and LLM outputs are available at https://github.com/yfqiu-nlp/temporal-llms.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Temporal reasoning for timeline summarisation in social media

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A knowledge-distillation framework that injects temporal reasoning into a small language model improves its timeline summaries on out-of-domain mental-health social media data.

  2. VLM-AD: End-to-End Autonomous Driving through Vision-Language Model Supervision

    cs.CV 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    VLM-AD uses GPT-4o-generated reasoning and action annotations as auxiliary supervision to improve end-to-end autonomous driving planning without VLM inference.

Pith tools