Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

A Statistical Analysis of LLMs' Self-Evaluation Using Proverbs

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 2410.16640 v1 pith:V3ZXPPOI submitted 2024-10-22 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords llmsacrossproverbself-evaluationconsistenciesgendernovelproverbs
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, GPT-4, Claude-3, and Llama are being integrated across a variety of industries. Despite this rapid proliferation, experts are calling for caution in the interpretation and adoption of LLMs, owing to numerous associated ethical concerns. Research has also uncovered shortcomings in LLMs' reasoning and logical abilities, raising questions on the potential of LLMs as evaluation tools. In this paper, we investigate LLMs' self-evaluation capabilities on a novel proverb reasoning task. We introduce a novel proverb database consisting of 300 proverb pairs that are similar in intent but different in wordings, across topics spanning gender, wisdom, and society. We propose tests to evaluate textual consistencies as well as numerical consistencies across similar proverbs, and demonstrate the effectiveness of our method and dataset in identifying failures in LLMs' self-evaluation which in turn can highlight issues related to gender stereotypes and lack of cultural understanding in 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. Explain-Query-Test: Self-Evaluating LLMs Via Explanation and Comprehension Discrepancy

    cs.CL 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A model's accuracy on questions it generates about its own explanations correlates with MMLU-Pro only at r = 0.361, and the paper claims this can serve as a test-set-free ranking proxy.

Pith tools