Large Language Models Often Say One Thing and Do Another
Ruoxi Xu Hongyu Lin Xianpei Han Jia Zheng Weixiang Zhou Le Sun Yingfei Sun
As large language models (LLMs) increasingly become central to various applications and interact with diverse user populations, ensuring their reliable and consistent performance is becoming more important. This paper explores a critical issue in assessing the reliability of LLMs: the consistency between their words and deeds. To quantitatively explore this consistency, we developed a novel evaluation benchmark called the Words and Deeds Consistency Test (WDCT). The benchmark establishes a strict correspondence between word-based and deed-based questions across different domains, including opinion vs. action, non-ethical value vs. action, ethical value vs. action, and theory vs. application. The evaluation results reveal a widespread inconsistency between words and deeds across different LLMs and domains. Subsequently, we conducted experiments with either word alignment or deed alignment to observe their impact on the other aspect. The experimental results indicate that alignment only on words or deeds poorly and unpredictably influences the other aspect. This supports our hypothesis that the underlying knowledge guiding LLMs' word or deed choices is not contained within a unified space. Dataset and code are available at [https://github.com/icip-cas/Word-Deed-Consistency-Test](https://github.com/icip-cas/Word-Deed-Consistency-Test).
corpus creation, benchmarking, language resources, NLP datasets, evaluation, metrics, consistency