Evaluating Consistencies in LLM responses through a Semantic Clustering of Question Answering

In the realm of Large Language Model (LLM) functionalities, providing reliable information is paramount, yet reports suggest that LLM outputs lack consistency. This inconsistency, often at-tributed to randomness in token sampling, under-mines user trust as it leads to varying responses even for identical queries. In this paper, we present a new approach for evaluating semantic consistencies of LLM including comparison of alternative tech-niques. Our approach evaluates whether LLM re-sponses are semantically congruent for a given question, recognizing that as syntactically different sentences may convey the same meaning. Here-tofore, To enhance LLM consistency, two main approaches have been explored: Leverage external knowledge as context like the RAG pattern or use Zero-shot-CoT to improve performance of LLM itself. We apply our evaluation approach to these techniques, and demonstrate to compare the im-pact of these methods on LLM response con-sistency across different domains of question an-swering tasks. Using the TruthfulQA dataset to assess LLM responses, the study induces N re-sponses per question from the LLM and clusters semantically equivalent sentences to measure semantic consistency across 37 categories. Through this, it quantitatively analyzes the effectiveness of the aforementioned methods in improving LLM performance before and after their adoption.

Improving LLM Classification of Logical Errors by Integrating Error Relationship into Prompts

LLMs trained in the understanding of programming syntax are now providing effective assistance to developers and are being used in programming education such as in generation of coding problem examples or providing code explanations. A key aspect of programming education is understanding and dealing with error message. However, 'logical errors' in which the program operates against the programmer's intentions do not receive error messages from the compiler. In this study, building on existing research on programming errors, we first define the types of logical errors that can occur in programming in general. Based on the definition, we propose an effective approach for detecting logical errors with LLMs that makes use of relations among error types in the Chain-of-Thought and Tree-of-Thought prompts. The experimental results indicate that when such logical error descriptions in the prompt are used, the average classifition performance is about 21% higher than the ones without them. We also conducted an experiment for exploiting the relations among errors in generating a new logical error dataset using LLMs. As there is very limited dataset for logical errors such benchmark dataset can be very useful for various programming related applications. We expect that our work can assist novice programmers in identifying the causes of code errors and correct them more effectively.