paint-brush
Misalignment Between Instructions and Responses in Domain-Specific LLM Tasksby@largemodels
110 reads

Misalignment Between Instructions and Responses in Domain-Specific LLM Tasks

by Large Models (dot tech)December 15th, 2024
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

Four types of misaligned outputs were identified in LLM responses: empty outputs, incorrect responses, repeated prompts, and misaligned Chain-of-Thought reasoning. BioMistral-7B and Meta-Llama-3-8B particularly struggled with domain-specific knowledge on human genome pathways, reflecting pre-training and safety mechanism limitations.
featured image - Misalignment Between Instructions and Responses in Domain-Specific LLM Tasks
Large Models (dot tech) HackerNoon profile picture
  1. Abstract and Introduction
  2. SylloBio-NLI
  3. Empirical Evaluation
  4. Related Work
  5. Conclusions
  6. Limitations and References


A. Formalization of the SylloBio-NLI Resource Generation Process

B. Formalization of Tasks 1 and 2

C. Dictionary of gene and pathway membership

D. Domain-specific pipeline for creating NL instances and E Accessing LLMs

F. Experimental Details

G. Evaluation Metrics

H. Prompting LLMs - Zero-shot prompts

I. Prompting LLMs - Few-shot prompts

J. Results: Misaligned Instruction-Response

K. Results: Ambiguous Impact of Distractors on Reasoning

L. Results: Models Prioritize Contextual Knowledge Over Background Knowledge

M Supplementary Figures and N Supplementary Tables

J Results: Misaligned Instruction-Response

We observed four types of text outputs: those aligned with the instruction (regardless of correctness), empty outputs where no text was generated, incorrect text outputs such as repeated prompts or random content, and outputs resembling Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning that, while potentially containing correct reasoning, did not align with the given instructions (Figs. 8-11). We noticed that BioMistral-7B generated empty outputs in 100% of the cases regardless of the specific settings, while Meta-Llama-3-8B exhibits this behaviour for ZS settings in both tasks. We attribute this observation to safety mechanisms applied during pre-training Labrak et al. [2024], suggesting that domain-specific knowledge about human genome pathways is absent in both models. Similarly, Mistral-7B-v0.1 responses simply repeat the prompt text in 88% of the cases in the ZS settings, and 69% of the cases in FS (Table 1). Moreover, CoT outputs including phrases like e.g. "A nice logical puzzle! Let’s break it down step by step..." were particularly common for Meta-Llama-3-8B Instruct, which often ignored the specific instructions to address the task. This behaviour highlights potential biases introduced during instruction-tuning which make the models unable to generalise to domains that are out-of-distribution of the training set.


Authors:

(1) Magdalena Wysocka, National Biomarker Centre, CRUK-MI, Univ. of Manchester, United Kingdom;

(2) Danilo S. Carvalho, National Biomarker Centre, CRUK-MI, Univ. of Manchester, United Kingdom and Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Manchester, United Kingdom;

(3) Oskar Wysocki, National Biomarker Centre, CRUK-MI, Univ. of Manchester, United Kingdom and ited Kingdom 3 I;

(4) Marco Valentino, Idiap Research Institute, Switzerland;

(5) André Freitas, National Biomarker Centre, CRUK-MI, Univ. of Manchester, United Kingdom, Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Manchester, United Kingdom and Idiap Research Institute, Switzerland.


This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.