arXiv preprint ·
Pushback in a Haystack: Language Models Respond to Factual Errors Ambiguously and Ineffectively
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
The sycophancy of language models, or their failure to push back against faulty user input, is now widely studied. However, if LMs do push back, is sycophancy solved? We show that LMs vary in how they present pushback, and thus vary in how effectively they correct user beliefs. We introduce a phrase-level, human-validated response labeling framework to uncover fine-grained insights into how LMs push against and/or affirm false inputs. We develop and apply our framework on model responses in five languages: English, German, Chinese, Hindi, and Yoruba. We find that when models do push back against users' false assertions, they tend to use indirect phrasing and mix in affirmation, with more indirectness in Hindi and Yoruba than in other languages considered. In a large-scale human study (n = 300), we find that the pushback ambiguity we identified may fail to correct and prevent users' factual misconceptions.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
Everyone Was Right: Lexical Representations in Language Models Are Both Abstract and Holistic
TopicMerge: A Divide and Conquer Approach to Topic Modeling
Many Steps into One: Reasoning Contraction and the Limits of Safe Memory Reuse for LLM Agents
LLM-jp-4 Technical Report
Reference Wording Shapes Retrieval of Robot Task Instructions
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.