DeCoRe: Decoding by Contrasting Retrieval Heads to Mitigate Hallucinations

Large Language Models (LLMs) often hallucinate, producing unfaithful or factually incorrect outputs by misrepresenting the provided context or incorrectly recalling internal knowledge. Recent studies have identified specific attention heads within the Transformer architecture, known as retrieval heads, responsible for extracting relevant contextual information. We hypothesise that masking these retrieval heads can induce hallucinations and that contrasting the outputs of the base LLM and the masked LLM can reduce hallucinations. To this end, we propose Decoding by Contrasting Retrieval Heads (DeCoRe), a novel training-free decoding strategy that amplifies information found in the context and model parameters. DeCoRe mitigates potentially hallucinated responses by dynamically contrasting the outputs of the base LLM and the masked LLM, using conditional entropy as a guide. Our extensive experiments confirm that DeCoRe significantly improves performance on tasks requiring high contextual faithfulness, such as summarisation (XSum by 18.6%), instruction following (MemoTrap by 10.9%), and open-book question answering (NQ-Open by 2.4% and NQ-Swap by 5.5%).

Analysing the Residual Stream of Language Models Under Knowledge Conflicts

Large language models (LLMs) can store a significant amount of factual knowledge in their parameters. However, their parametric knowledge may conflict with the information provided in the context. Such conflicts can lead to undesirable model behaviour, such as reliance on outdated or incorrect information. In this work, we investigate whether LLMs can identify knowledge conflicts and whether it is possible to know which source of knowledge the model will rely on by analysing the residual stream of the LLM. Through probing tasks, we find that LLMs can internally register the signal of knowledge conflict in the residual stream, which can be accurately detected by probing the intermediate model activations. This allows us to detect conflicts within the residual stream before generating the answers without modifying the input or model parameters. Moreover, we find that the residual stream shows significantly different patterns when the model relies on contextual knowledge versus parametric knowledge to resolve conflicts. This pattern can be employed to estimate the behaviour of LLMs when conflict happens and prevent unexpected answers before producing the answers. Our analysis offers insights into how LLMs internally manage knowledge conflicts and provides a foundation for developing methods to control the knowledge selection processes.

Steering Knowledge Selection Behaviours in LLMs via SAE-Based Representation Engineering

Large language models (LLMs) can store a significant amount of factual knowledge in their parameters. However, their parametric knowledge may conflict with the information provided in the context -- this phenomenon, known as \emph{context-memory knowledge conflicts}, can lead to undesirable model behaviour, such as reliance on outdated or incorrect information. Analysing the internal activations of LLMs, we find that they can internally register the signals of knowledge conflict at mid-layers. Such signals allow us to detect whether a knowledge conflict occurs and use \emph{inference-time} intervention strategies to resolve it. In this work, we propose \textsc{SpARE}, a \emph{training-free} representation engineering method that uses pre-trained sparse auto-encoders (SAEs) to control the knowledge selection behaviour of LLMs. \textsc{SpARE} identifies the functional features that control the knowledge selection behaviours and applies them to edit the internal activations of LLMs at inference time. Our experimental results show that \textsc{SpARE} can effectively control the usage of either knowledge source to resolve knowledge conflict in open-domain question-answering tasks, surpassing existing representation engineering methods ($+10\%$) as well as contrastive decoding methods ($+15\%$).

CoMAT: Chain of Mathematically Annotated Thought Improves Mathematical Reasoning

Mathematical reasoning remains a significant challenge for large language models (LLMs), despite progress in prompting techniques such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT). We present Chain of Mathematically Annotated Thought (CoMAT), which enhances reasoning through two stages: Symbolic Conversion (converting natural language queries into symbolic form) and Reasoning Execution (deriving answers from symbolic representations). CoMAT operates entirely with a single LLM and without external solvers. Across four LLMs, CoMAT outperforms traditional CoT on six out of seven benchmarks, achieving gains of 4.48% on MMLU-Redux (MATH) and 4.58% on GaoKao MCQ. In addition to improved performance, CoMAT ensures faithfulness and verifiability, offering a transparent reasoning process for complex mathematical tasks

A Comparative Study on Patient Language across Therapeutic Domains for Effective Patient Voice Classification in Online Health Discussions

There exists an invisible barrier between healthcare professionals' perception of a patient's clinical experience and the reality. This barrier may be induced by the environment that hinders patients from sharing their experiences openly with healthcare professionals. As patients are observed to discuss and exchange knowledge more candidly on social media, valuable insights can be leveraged from these platforms. However, the abundance of non-patient posts on social media necessitates filtering out such irrelevant content to distinguish the genuine voices of patients, a task we refer to as patient voice classification. In this study, we analyse the importance of linguistic characteristics in accurately classifying patient voices. Our findings underscore the essential role of linguistic and statistical text similarity analysis in identifying common patterns among patient groups. These results allude to even starker differences in the way patients express themselves at a disease level and across various therapeutic domains. Additionally, we fine-tuned a pre-trained Language Model on the combined datasets with similar linguistic patterns, resulting in a highly accurate automatic patient voice classification. Being the pioneering study on the topic, our focus on extracting authentic patient experiences from social media stands as a crucial step towards advancing healthcare standards and fostering a patient-centric approach.

Are We Done with MMLU?

Maybe not. We identify and analyse errors in the popular Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) benchmark. Even though MMLU is widely adopted, our analysis demonstrates numerous ground truth errors that obscure the true capabilities of LLMs. For example, we find that 57% of the analysed questions in the Virology subset contain errors. To address this issue, we introduce a comprehensive framework for identifying dataset errors using a novel error taxonomy. Then, we create MMLU-Redux, which is a subset of 3,000 manually re-annotated questions across 30 MMLU subjects. Using MMLU-Redux, we demonstrate significant discrepancies with the model performance metrics that were originally reported. Our results strongly advocate for revising MMLU's error-ridden questions to enhance its future utility and reliability as a benchmark. Therefore, we open up MMLU-Redux for additional annotation https://huggingface.co/datasets/edinburgh-dawg/mmlu-redux.

Edinburgh Clinical NLP at MEDIQA-CORR 2024: Guiding Large Language Models with Hints

The MEDIQA-CORR 2024 shared task aims to assess the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to identify and correct medical errors in clinical notes. In this study, we evaluate the capability of general LLMs, specifically GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, to identify and correct medical errors with multiple prompting strategies. Recognising the limitation of LLMs in generating accurate corrections only via prompting strategies, we propose incorporating error-span predictions from a smaller, fine-tuned model in two ways: 1) by presenting it as a hint in the prompt and 2) by framing it as multiple-choice questions from which the LLM can choose the best correction. We found that our proposed prompting strategies significantly improve the LLM's ability to generate corrections. Our best-performing solution with 8-shot + CoT + hints ranked sixth in the shared task leaderboard. Additionally, our comprehensive analyses show the impact of the location of the error sentence, the prompted role, and the position of the multiple-choice option on the accuracy of the LLM. This prompts further questions about the readiness of LLM to be implemented in real-world clinical settings.

The Hallucinations Leaderboard -- An Open Effort to Measure Hallucinations in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed the Natural Language Processing (NLP) landscape with their remarkable ability to understand and generate human-like text. However, these models are prone to ``hallucinations'' -- outputs that do not align with factual reality or the input context. This paper introduces the Hallucinations Leaderboard, an open initiative to quantitatively measure and compare the tendency of each model to produce hallucinations. The leaderboard uses a comprehensive set of benchmarks focusing on different aspects of hallucinations, such as factuality and faithfulness, across various tasks, including question-answering, summarisation, and reading comprehension. Our analysis provides insights into the performance of different models, guiding researchers and practitioners in choosing the most reliable models for their applications.

Edinburgh Clinical NLP at SemEval-2024 Task 2: Fine-tune your model unless you have access to GPT-4

The NLI4CT task assesses Natural Language Inference systems in predicting whether hypotheses entail or contradict evidence from Clinical Trial Reports. In this study, we evaluate various Large Language Models (LLMs) with multiple strategies, including Chain-of-Thought, In-Context Learning, and Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT). We propose a PEFT method to improve the consistency of LLMs by merging adapters that were fine-tuned separately using triplet and language modelling objectives. We found that merging the two PEFT adapters improves the F1 score (+0.0346) and consistency (+0.152) of the LLMs. However, our novel methods did not produce more accurate results than GPT-4 in terms of faithfulness and consistency. Averaging the three metrics, GPT-4 ranks joint-first in the competition with 0.8328. Finally, our contamination analysis with GPT-4 indicates that there was no test data leakage.

Can GPT-3.5 Generate and Code Discharge Summaries?

Objective: To investigate GPT-3.5 in generating and coding medical documents with ICD-10 codes for data augmentation on low-resources labels. Materials and Methods: Employing GPT-3.5 we generated and coded 9,606 discharge summaries based on lists of ICD-10 code descriptions of patients with infrequent (generation) codes within the MIMIC-IV dataset. Combined with the baseline training set, this formed an augmented training set. Neural coding models were trained on baseline and augmented data and evaluated on a MIMIC-IV test set. We report micro- and macro-F1 scores on the full codeset, generation codes, and their families. Weak Hierarchical Confusion Matrices were employed to determine within-family and outside-of-family coding errors in the latter codesets. The coding performance of GPT-3.5 was evaluated both on prompt-guided self-generated data and real MIMIC-IV data. Clinical professionals evaluated the clinical acceptability of the generated documents. Results: Augmentation slightly hinders the overall performance of the models but improves performance for the generation candidate codes and their families, including one unseen in the baseline training data. Augmented models display lower out-of-family error rates. GPT-3.5 can identify ICD-10 codes by the prompted descriptions, but performs poorly on real data. Evaluators note the correctness of generated concepts while suffering in variety, supporting information, and narrative. Discussion and Conclusion: GPT-3.5 alone is unsuitable for ICD-10 coding. Augmentation positively affects generation code families but mainly benefits codes with existing examples. Augmentation reduces out-of-family errors. Discharge summaries generated by GPT-3.5 state prompted concepts correctly but lack variety, and authenticity in narratives. They are unsuitable for clinical practice.