Reverse Question Answering: Can an LLM Write a Question so Hard (or Bad) that it Can't Answer?

Fuente: arXiv
Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Balepur, Nishant, Gu, Feng, Ravichander, Abhilasha, Feng, Shi, Boyd-Graber, Jordan, Rudinger, Rachel
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2024
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866913687405592576
author Balepur, Nishant
Gu, Feng
Ravichander, Abhilasha
Feng, Shi
Boyd-Graber, Jordan
Rudinger, Rachel
author_facet Balepur, Nishant
Gu, Feng
Ravichander, Abhilasha
Feng, Shi
Boyd-Graber, Jordan
Rudinger, Rachel
contents Question answering (QA), giving correct answers to questions, is a popular task, but we test reverse question answering (RQA): for an input answer, give a question with that answer. Past work tests QA and RQA separately, but we test them jointly, comparing their difficulty, aiding benchmark design, and checking reasoning consistency. We run 16 LLMs on QA and RQA with trivia questions/answers, revealing: 1) Versus QA, LLMs are much less accurate in RQA for numerical answers, but slightly more accurate in RQA for textual answers; 2) LLMs often answer their own invalid questions from RQA accurately in QA, so RQA errors are not from knowledge gaps alone; 3) RQA errors correlate with question difficulty and inversely correlate with answer frequencies in the Dolma corpus; and 4) LLMs struggle to provide valid multi-hop questions. By finding question and answer types that lead to RQA errors, we suggest improvements for LLM reasoning.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_15512
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Reverse Question Answering: Can an LLM Write a Question so Hard (or Bad) that it Can't Answer?
Balepur, Nishant
Gu, Feng
Ravichander, Abhilasha
Feng, Shi
Boyd-Graber, Jordan
Rudinger, Rachel
Computation and Language
Question answering (QA), giving correct answers to questions, is a popular task, but we test reverse question answering (RQA): for an input answer, give a question with that answer. Past work tests QA and RQA separately, but we test them jointly, comparing their difficulty, aiding benchmark design, and checking reasoning consistency. We run 16 LLMs on QA and RQA with trivia questions/answers, revealing: 1) Versus QA, LLMs are much less accurate in RQA for numerical answers, but slightly more accurate in RQA for textual answers; 2) LLMs often answer their own invalid questions from RQA accurately in QA, so RQA errors are not from knowledge gaps alone; 3) RQA errors correlate with question difficulty and inversely correlate with answer frequencies in the Dolma corpus; and 4) LLMs struggle to provide valid multi-hop questions. By finding question and answer types that lead to RQA errors, we suggest improvements for LLM reasoning.
title Reverse Question Answering: Can an LLM Write a Question so Hard (or Bad) that it Can't Answer?
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.15512