Can Large Language Models Explain Themselves? A Study of LLM-Generated Self-Explanations
Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have demonstrated superior performance on a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks including sentiment analysis, mathematical reasoning and summarization. Furthermore, since these models are instruction-tuned on human conversations to produce "helpful" responses, they can and often will produce explanations along with the response, which we call self-explanations. For example, when analyzing the sentiment of a movie review, the model may output not only the positivity of the sentiment, but also an explanation (e.g., by listing the sentiment-laden words such as "fantastic" and "memorable" in the review). How good are these automatically generated self-explanations? In this paper, we investigate this question on the task of sentiment analysis and for feature attribution explanation, one of the most commonly studied settings in the interpretability literature (for pre-ChatGPT models). Specifically, we study different ways to elicit the self-explanations, evaluate their faithfulness on a set of evaluation metrics, and compare them to traditional explanation methods such as occlusion or LIME saliency maps. Through an extensive set of experiments, we find that ChatGPT's self-explanations perform on par with traditional ones, but are quite different from them according to various agreement metrics, meanwhile being much cheaper to produce (as they are generated along with the prediction). In addition, we identified several interesting characteristics of them, which prompt us to rethink many current model interpretability practices in the era of ChatGPT(-like) LLMs.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Mathematical ReasoningSentiment AnalysisMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Can LLMs Faithfully Explain Themselves in Low-Resource Languages? A Case Study on Emotion Detection in Persian
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate self-explanations alongside their predictions, a practice that raises concerns about the faithfulness of these explanations, especially in low-resource langu…
Emotion ClassificationDo Models Explain Themselves? Counterfactual Simulatability of Natural Language Explanations
Large language models (LLMs) are trained to imitate humans to explain human decisions. However, do LLMs explain themselves? Can they help humans build mental models of how LLMs process different inputs? To answer these q…
counterfactualCan LLMs Explain Themselves Counterfactually?
Explanations are an important tool for gaining insights into the behavior of ML models, calibrating user trust and ensuring regulatory compliance. Past few years have seen a flurry of post-hoc methods for generating mode…
counterfactualCounterfactual ReasoningLanguage ModelingLanguage Modelling+1A Psychological Theory of Explainability
The goal of explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is to generate human-interpretable explanations, but there are no computationally precise theories of how humans interpret AI generated explanations. The lack of theo…
Explainable artificial intelligenceExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Explainable AI-Generated Image Detection RewardBench
Conventional, classification-based AI-generated image detection methods cannot explain why an image is considered real or AI-generated in a way a human expert would, which reduces the trustworthiness and persuasiveness o…
Image Generation