REVIEW 3 cited by
Serial Position Effects of Large Language Models
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
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in zero-shot learning applications, generating responses to queries using only pre-training information without the need for additional fine-tuning. This represents a significant departure from traditional machine learning approaches. Previous research has indicated that LLMs may exhibit serial position effects, such as primacy and recency biases, which are well-documented cognitive biases in human psychology. Our extensive testing across various tasks and models confirms the widespread occurrence of these effects, although their intensity varies. We also discovered that while carefully designed prompts can somewhat mitigate these biases, their effectiveness is inconsistent. These findings underscore the significance of serial position effects during the inference process, particularly in scenarios where there are no ground truth labels, highlighting the need for greater focus on addressing these effects in LLM applications.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
How Many Instructions Can LLMs Follow at Once?
IFScale measures instruction-following at densities from 10 to 500 constraints and finds that even top frontier models satisfy only about two-thirds of 500 simultaneous keyword instructions.
-
Emergence of Episodic Memory in Transformers: Characterizing Changes in Temporal Structure of Attention Scores During Training
Attention heads in trained GPT-2 models develop temporal contiguity, recency, and primacy effects, and ablating induction heads removes the resulting serial-recall bias in outputs.
-
Analysis of LLM as a grammatical feature tagger for African American English
LLMs are worse than rule-based and transformer baselines at detecting Habitual Be and Multiple Negation in African American English, and their errors correlate with recency and formality biases.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.