Evaluating the Ability of Large Language Models to Reason about Cardinal Directions

We investigate the abilities of a representative set of Large language Models (LLMs) to reason about cardinal directions (CDs). To do so, we create two datasets: the first, co-created with ChatGPT, focuses largely on recall of world knowledge about CDs; the second is generated from a set of templates, comprehensively testing an LLM's ability to determine the correct CD given a particular scenario. The templates allow for a number of degrees of variation such as means of locomotion of the agent involved, and whether set in the first , second or third person. Even with a temperature setting of zero, Our experiments show that although LLMs are able to perform well in the simpler dataset, in the second more complex dataset no LLM is able to reliably determine the correct CD, even with a temperature setting of zero.

An Evaluation of ChatGPT-4's Qualitative Spatial Reasoning Capabilities in RCC-8

Qualitative Spatial Reasoning (QSR) is well explored area of Commonsense Reasoning and has multiple applications ranging from Geographical Information Systems to Robotics and Computer Vision. Recently many claims have been made for the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). In this paper we investigate the extent to which one particular LLM can perform classical qualitative spatial reasoning tasks on the mereotopological calculus, RCC-8.

Dialectical language model evaluation: An initial appraisal of the commonsense spatial reasoning abilities of LLMs

Language models have become very popular recently and many claims have been made about their abilities, including for commonsense reasoning. Given the increasingly better results of current language models on previous static benchmarks for commonsense reasoning, we explore an alternative dialectical evaluation. The goal of this kind of evaluation is not to obtain an aggregate performance value but to find failures and map the boundaries of the system. Dialoguing with the system gives the opportunity to check for consistency and get more reassurance of these boundaries beyond anecdotal evidence. In this paper we conduct some qualitative investigations of this kind of evaluation for the particular case of spatial reasoning (which is a fundamental aspect of commonsense reasoning). We conclude with some suggestions for future work both to improve the capabilities of language models and to systematise this kind of dialectical evaluation.