To Know or Not To Know? Analyzing Self-Consistency of Large Language Models under Ambiguity
<|reference_start|>To Know or Not To Know? Analyzing Self-Consistency of Large Language Models under Ambiguity: One of the major aspects contributing to the striking performance of large language models (LLMs) is the vast amount of factual knowledge accumulated during pre-training. Yet, many LLMs suffer from self-inconsistency, which raises doubts about their trustworthiness and reliability. This paper focuses on entity type ambiguity, analyzing the proficiency and consistency of state-of-the-art LLMs in applying factual knowledge when prompted with ambiguous entities. To do so, we propose an evaluation protocol that disentangles knowing from applying knowledge, and test state-of-the-art LLMs on 49 ambiguous entities. Our experiments reveal that LLMs struggle with choosing the correct entity reading, achieving an average accuracy of only 85%, and as low as 75% with underspecified prompts. The results also reveal systematic discrepancies in LLM behavior, showing that while the models may possess knowledge, they struggle to apply it consistently, exhibit biases toward preferred readings, and display self-inconsistencies. This highlights the need to address entity ambiguity in the future for more trustworthy LLMs.<|reference_end|>
@article{sedova2024to,
    title={To Know or Not To Know? Analyzing Self-Consistency of Large Language
  Models under Ambiguity},
    author={Anastasiia Sedova, Robert Litschko, Diego Frassinelli, Benjamin Roth,
  Barbara Plank},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.17125},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2407.17125},
    primaryClass={cs.CL cs.LG}
}