Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Won't Get Fooled Again: Answering Questions with False Premises

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2307.02394 v1 pith:4HSX2MRA submitted 2023-07-05 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords plmsquestionsfpqsfalseknowledgepremisesexplanationsfalseqa
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Pre-trained language models (PLMs) have shown unprecedented potential in various fields, especially as the backbones for question-answering (QA) systems. However, they tend to be easily deceived by tricky questions such as "How many eyes does the sun have?". Such frailties of PLMs often allude to the lack of knowledge within them. In this paper, we find that the PLMs already possess the knowledge required to rebut such questions, and the key is how to activate the knowledge. To systematize this observation, we investigate the PLMs' responses to one kind of tricky questions, i.e., the false premises questions (FPQs). We annotate a FalseQA dataset containing 2365 human-written FPQs, with the corresponding explanations for the false premises and the revised true premise questions. Using FalseQA, we discover that PLMs are capable of discriminating FPQs by fine-tuning on moderate numbers (e.g., 256) of examples. PLMs also generate reasonable explanations for the false premise, which serve as rebuttals. Further replaying a few general questions during training allows PLMs to excel on FPQs and general questions simultaneously. Our work suggests that once the rebuttal ability is stimulated, knowledge inside the PLMs can be effectively utilized to handle FPQs, which incentivizes the research on PLM-based QA systems.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Large Language Models Meet Symbolic Provers for Logical Reasoning Evaluation

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ProverGen combines LLM-generated text with Prover9-verified reasoning trees to produce ProverQA, a first-order logic benchmark where advanced LLMs fall below 60% accuracy on the hard split.

Pith tools