Related papers: Do Models Explain Themselves? Counterfactual Simul…

Large Language Models (LLMs) can produce verbalized self-explanations, yet prior studies suggest that such rationales may not reliably reflect the model's true decision process. We ask whether these explanations nevertheless help users…

This paper investigates the reliability of explanations generated by large language models (LLMs) when prompted to explain their previous output. We evaluate two kinds of such self-explanations - extractive and counterfactual - using three…

Large language models (LLMs) often generate convincing, fluent explanations. However, different from humans, they often generate inconsistent explanations on different inputs. For example, an LLM may generate the explanation "all birds can…

Explanations are an important tool for gaining insights into the behavior of ML models, calibrating user trust and ensuring regulatory compliance. Past few years have seen a flurry of post-hoc methods for generating model explanations, many…

To collaborate effectively with humans, language models must be able to explain their decisions in natural language. We study a specific type of self-explanation: self-generated counterfactual explanations (SCEs), where a model explains its…

Instruction-tuned Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at many tasks and will even explain their reasoning, so-called self-explanations. However, convincing and wrong self-explanations can lead to unsupported confidence in LLMs, thus…

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have demonstrated superior performance on a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks including sentiment analysis, mathematical reasoning and summarization. Furthermore, since these…

LLMs can be unpredictable, as even slight alterations to the prompt can cause the output to change in unexpected ways. Thus, the ability of models to accurately explain their behavior is critical, especially in high-stakes settings. One…

Explanations of neural models aim to reveal a model's decision-making process for its predictions. However, recent work shows that current methods giving explanations such as saliency maps or counterfactuals can be misleading, as they are…

Large language models (LLMs) are the result of a massive experiment in bottom-up, data-driven reverse engineering of language at scale. Despite their utility in a number of downstream NLP tasks, ample research has shown that LLMs are…

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable successes on various tasks. However, recent studies have found that there are still significant challenges to the logical reasoning abilities of LLMs, which can be categorized into the…

We posit that large language models (LLMs) should be capable of expressing their intrinsic uncertainty in natural language. For example, if the LLM is equally likely to output two contradicting answers to the same question, then its…

Do large language models (LLMs) display rational reasoning? LLMs have been shown to contain human biases due to the data they have been trained on; whether this is reflected in rational reasoning remains less clear. In this paper, we answer…

Large language models (LLMs) are a promising venue for natural language understanding and generation tasks. However, current LLMs are far from reliable: they are prone to generate non-factual information and, more crucially, to contradict…

Can language models (LMs) learn to faithfully describe their internal computations? Are they better able to describe themselves than other models? We study the extent to which LMs' privileged access to their own internals can be leveraged…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for accessing information on the web. Their truthfulness and factuality are thus of great interest. To help users make the right decisions about the information they get, LLMs should not…

As machine learning models evolve, maintaining transparency demands more human-centric explainable AI techniques. Counterfactual explanations, with roots in human reasoning, identify the minimal input changes needed to obtain a given output…

The cognitive mechanism by which Large Language Models (LLMs) solve mathematical problems remains a widely debated and unresolved issue. Currently, there is little interpretable experimental evidence that connects LLMs' problem-solving with…

The self-rationalising capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have been explored in restricted settings, using task/specific data sets. However, current LLMs do not (only) rely on specifically annotated data; nonetheless, they…

While humans sometimes do show the capability of correcting their own erroneous guesses with self-critiquing, there seems to be no basis for that assumption in the case of LLMs.