Negotiation is the basis of social interactions; humans negotiate everything from the price of cars to how to share common resources. With rapidly growing interest in using large language models (LLMs) to act as agents on behalf of human users, such LLM agents would also need to be able to negotiate. In this paper, we study how well LLMs can negotiate with each other. We develop NegotiationArena: a flexible framework for evaluating and probing the negotiation abilities of LLM agents. We implemented three types of scenarios in NegotiationArena to assess LLM's behaviors in allocating shared resources (ultimatum games), aggregate resources (trading games) and buy/sell goods (price negotiations). Each scenario allows for multiple turns of flexible dialogues between LLM agents to allow for more complex negotiations. Interestingly, LLM agents can significantly boost their negotiation outcomes by employing certain behavioral tactics. For example, by pretending to be desolate and desperate, LLMs can improve their payoffs by 20\% when negotiating against the standard GPT-4. We also quantify irrational negotiation behaviors exhibited by the LLM agents, many of which also appear in humans. Together, \NegotiationArena offers a new environment to investigate LLM interactions, enabling new insights into LLM's theory of mind, irrationality, and reasoning abilities.
Recent breakthroughs in large language models (LLMs) have led to their rapid dissemination and widespread use. One early application has been to medicine, where LLMs have been investigated to streamline clinical workflows and facilitate clinical analysis and decision-making. However, a leading barrier to the deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and in particular LLMs has been concern for embedded gender and racial biases. Here, we evaluate whether a leading LLM, ChatGPT 3.5, exhibits gender and racial bias in clinical management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We find that specifying patients as female, African American, or Hispanic resulted in a decrease in guideline recommended medical management, diagnosis, and symptom management of ACS. Most notably, the largest disparities were seen in the recommendation of coronary angiography or stress testing for the diagnosis and further intervention of ACS and recommendation of high intensity statins. These disparities correlate with biases that have been observed clinically and have been implicated in the differential gender and racial morbidity and mortality outcomes of ACS and coronary artery disease. Furthermore, we find that the largest disparities are seen during unstable angina, where fewer explicit clinical guidelines exist. Finally, we find that through asking ChatGPT 3.5 to explain its reasoning prior to providing an answer, we are able to improve clinical accuracy and mitigate instances of gender and racial biases. This is among the first studies to demonstrate that the gender and racial biases that LLMs exhibit do in fact affect clinical management. Additionally, we demonstrate that existing strategies that improve LLM performance not only improve LLM performance in clinical management, but can also be used to mitigate gender and racial biases.
We study the ability of state-of-the art models to answer constraint satisfaction queries for information retrieval (e.g., 'a list of ice cream shops in San Diego'). In the past, such queries were considered to be tasks that could only be solved via web-search or knowledge bases. More recently, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated initial emergent abilities in this task. However, many current retrieval benchmarks are either saturated or do not measure constraint satisfaction. Motivated by rising concerns around factual incorrectness and hallucinations of LLMs, we present KITAB, a new dataset for measuring constraint satisfaction abilities of language models. KITAB consists of book-related data across more than 600 authors and 13,000 queries, and also offers an associated dynamic data collection and constraint verification approach for acquiring similar test data for other authors. Our extended experiments on GPT4 and GPT3.5 characterize and decouple common failure modes across dimensions such as information popularity, constraint types, and context availability. Results show that in the absence of context, models exhibit severe limitations as measured by irrelevant information, factual errors, and incompleteness, many of which exacerbate as information popularity decreases. While context availability mitigates irrelevant information, it is not helpful for satisfying constraints, identifying fundamental barriers to constraint satisfaction. We open source our contributions to foster further research on improving constraint satisfaction abilities of future models.
Large language models (LLMs) are documented to struggle in settings that require complex reasoning. Nevertheless, instructing the model to break down the problem into smaller reasoning steps (Wei et al., 2022), or ensembling various generations through modifying decoding steps (Wang et al., 2023) boosts performance. Current methods assume that the input prompt is fixed and expect the decoding strategies to introduce the diversity needed for ensembling. In this work, we relax this assumption and discuss how one can create and leverage variations of the input prompt as a means to diversity of thought to improve model performance. We propose a method that automatically improves prompt diversity by soliciting feedback from the LLM to ideate approaches that fit for the problem. We then ensemble the diverse prompts in our method DIV-SE (DIVerse reasoning path Self-Ensemble) across multiple inference calls. We also propose a cost-effective alternative where diverse prompts are used within a single inference call; we call this IDIV-SE (In-call DIVerse reasoning path Self-Ensemble). Under a fixed generation budget, DIV-SE and IDIV-SE outperform the previously discussed baselines using both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on several reasoning benchmarks, without modifying the decoding process. Additionally, DIV-SE advances state-of-the-art performance on recent planning benchmarks (Valmeekam et al., 2023), exceeding the highest previously reported accuracy by at least 29.6 percentage points on the most challenging 4/5 Blocksworld task. Our results shed light on how to enforce prompt diversity toward LLM reasoning and thereby improve the pareto frontier of the accuracy-cost trade-off.
We investigate the internal behavior of Transformer-based Large Language Models (LLMs) when they generate factually incorrect text. We propose modeling factual queries as Constraint Satisfaction Problems and use this framework to investigate how the model interacts internally with factual constraints. Specifically, we discover a strong positive relation between the model's attention to constraint tokens and the factual accuracy of its responses. In our curated suite of 11 datasets with over 40,000 prompts, we study the task of predicting factual errors with the Llama-2 family across all scales (7B, 13B, 70B). We propose SAT Probe, a method probing self-attention patterns, that can predict constraint satisfaction and factual errors, and allows early error identification. The approach and findings demonstrate how using the mechanistic understanding of factuality in LLMs can enhance reliability.
While most machine learning models can provide confidence in their predictions, confidence is insufficient to understand a prediction's reliability. For instance, the model may have a low confidence prediction if the input is not well-represented in the training dataset or if the input is inherently ambiguous. In this work, we investigate the relationship between how atypical(rare) a sample or a class is and the reliability of a model's predictions. We first demonstrate that atypicality is strongly related to miscalibration and accuracy. In particular, we empirically show that predictions for atypical inputs or atypical classes are more overconfident and have lower accuracy. Using these insights, we show incorporating atypicality improves uncertainty quantification and model performance for discriminative neural networks and large language models. In a case study, we show that using atypicality improves the performance of a skin lesion classifier across different skin tone groups without having access to the group attributes. Overall, we propose that models should use not only confidence but also atypicality to improve uncertainty quantification and performance. Our results demonstrate that simple post-hoc atypicality estimators can provide significant value.
* An earlier version was presented in the ICLR 2023 Pitfalls of Limited
Data and Computation for Trustworthy ML Workshop
Deep neural networks often rely on spurious correlations to make predictions, which hinders generalization beyond training environments. For instance, models that associate cats with bed backgrounds can fail to predict the existence of cats in other environments without beds. Mitigating spurious correlations is crucial in building trustworthy models. However, the existing works lack transparency to offer insights into the mitigation process. In this work, we propose an interpretable framework, Discover and Cure (DISC), to tackle the issue. With human-interpretable concepts, DISC iteratively 1) discovers unstable concepts across different environments as spurious attributes, then 2) intervenes on the training data using the discovered concepts to reduce spurious correlation. Across systematic experiments, DISC provides superior generalization ability and interpretability than the existing approaches. Specifically, it outperforms the state-of-the-art methods on an object recognition task and a skin-lesion classification task by 7.5% and 9.6%, respectively. Additionally, we offer theoretical analysis and guarantees to understand the benefits of models trained by DISC. Code and data are available at https://github.com/Wuyxin/DISC.
* Accepted to the main conference of ICML 2023. 21 pages
The rapid adoption of generative language models has brought about substantial advancements in digital communication, while simultaneously raising concerns regarding the potential misuse of AI-generated content. Although numerous detection methods have been proposed to differentiate between AI and human-generated content, the fairness and robustness of these detectors remain underexplored. In this study, we evaluate the performance of several widely-used GPT detectors using writing samples from native and non-native English writers. Our findings reveal that these detectors consistently misclassify non-native English writing samples as AI-generated, whereas native writing samples are accurately identified. Furthermore, we demonstrate that simple prompting strategies can not only mitigate this bias but also effectively bypass GPT detectors, suggesting that GPT detectors may unintentionally penalize writers with constrained linguistic expressions. Our results call for a broader conversation about the ethical implications of deploying ChatGPT content detectors and caution against their use in evaluative or educational settings, particularly when they may inadvertently penalize or exclude non-native English speakers from the global discourse.
For the deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) in high-risk settings, such as healthcare, methods that provide interpretability/explainability or allow fine-grained error analysis are critical. Many recent methods for interpretability/explainability and fine-grained error analysis use concepts, which are meta-labels that are semantically meaningful to humans. However, there are only a few datasets that include concept-level meta-labels and most of these meta-labels are relevant for natural images that do not require domain expertise. Densely annotated datasets in medicine focused on meta-labels that are relevant to a single disease such as melanoma. In dermatology, skin disease is described using an established clinical lexicon that allows clinicians to describe physical exam findings to one another. To provide a medical dataset densely annotated by domain experts with annotations useful across multiple disease processes, we developed SkinCon: a skin disease dataset densely annotated by dermatologists. SkinCon includes 3230 images from the Fitzpatrick 17k dataset densely annotated with 48 clinical concepts, 22 of which have at least 50 images representing the concept. The concepts used were chosen by two dermatologists considering the clinical descriptor terms used to describe skin lesions. Examples include "plaque", "scale", and "erosion". The same concepts were also used to label 656 skin disease images from the Diverse Dermatology Images dataset, providing an additional external dataset with diverse skin tone representations. We review the potential applications for the SkinCon dataset, such as probing models, concept-based explanations, and concept bottlenecks. Furthermore, we use SkinCon to demonstrate two of these use cases: debugging mistakes of an existing dermatology AI model with concepts and developing interpretable models with post-hoc concept bottleneck models.