Investigating the Factual Knowledge Boundary of Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmentation

AI-generated keywords: Large Language Models Retrieval Augmentation Factual Knowledge Boundary Open-Domain Question Answering Performance Enhancement

AI-generated Key Points

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • Study title: "Investigating the Factual Knowledge Boundary of Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmentation"
  • Researchers: Ruiyang Ren, Yuhao Wang, Yingqi Qu, Wayne Xin Zhao, Jing Liu, Hao Tian, Hua Wu, Ji-Rong Wen, Haifeng Wang
  • Focus on knowledge-intensive tasks like open-domain question answering (QA) that require external information support
  • Large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT show remarkable ability in handling tasks relying on world knowledge
  • Ambiguity around LLMs' discernment of factual knowledge boundaries and adaptation with retrieval augmentation
  • Analysis of QA performance to understand LLMs' awareness of their capabilities pre and post feedback
  • Findings show LLMs exhibit confidence in answering questions accurately but benefit from retrieval augmentation for improved judgemental abilities
  • LLMs rely on retrieved information for formulating responses, influenced by the quality of results
  • Importance of retrieval augmentation in enhancing LLMs' performance in complex tasks requiring factual knowledge
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Ruiyang Ren, Yuhao Wang, Yingqi Qu, Wayne Xin Zhao, Jing Liu, Hao Tian, Hua Wu, Ji-Rong Wen, Haifeng Wang

Abstract: Knowledge-intensive tasks (e.g., open-domain question answering (QA)) require a substantial amount of factual knowledge and often rely on external information for assistance. Recently, large language models (LLMs) (e.g., ChatGPT), have demonstrated impressive prowess in solving a wide range of tasks with world knowledge, including knowledge-intensive tasks. However, it remains unclear how well LLMs are able to perceive their factual knowledge boundaries, particularly how they behave when incorporating retrieval augmentation. In this study, we present an initial analysis of the factual knowledge boundaries of LLMs and how retrieval augmentation affects LLMs on open-domain QA. Specially, we focus on three primary research questions and analyze them by examining QA performance, priori judgement and posteriori judgement of LLMs. We show evidence that LLMs possess unwavering confidence in their capabilities to respond to questions and the accuracy of their responses. Furthermore, retrieval augmentation proves to be an effective approach in enhancing LLMs' awareness of knowledge boundaries, thereby improving their judgemental abilities. Additionally, we also find that LLMs have a propensity to rely on the provided retrieval results when formulating answers, while the quality of these results significantly impacts their reliance. The code to reproduce this work is available at https://github.com/RUCAIBox/LLM-Knowledge-Boundary.

Submitted to arXiv on 20 Jul. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2307.11019v1

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

In the study titled "Investigating the Factual Knowledge Boundary of Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmentation," conducted by Ruiyang Ren, Yuhao Wang, Yingqi Qu, Wayne Xin Zhao, Jing Liu, Hao Tian, Hua Wu, Ji-Rong Wen, and Haifeng Wang, the researchers delve into the realm of knowledge-intensive tasks such as open-domain question answering (QA). These tasks necessitate a significant amount of factual knowledge and often require external information for support. The advent of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT has showcased their remarkable ability to tackle a diverse array of tasks that rely on world knowledge, including those that are knowledge-intensive. However, a critical aspect that remains ambiguous is how well LLMs can discern their factual knowledge boundaries and how they adapt when incorporating retrieval augmentation. The researchers present an initial analysis focusing on three primary research questions to shed light on this matter. By evaluating QA performance and examining both priori judgement (before receiving feedback) and posteriori judgement (after receiving feedback) of LLMs , they aim to understand the extent of these models' awareness of their own capabilities. The findings reveal that LLMs exhibit unwavering confidence in their capacity to answer questions accurately. Moreover, the study demonstrates that retrieval augmentation serves as an effective strategy in enhancing LLMs' understanding of their and subsequently improving their judgemental abilities. Additionally, it is observed that LLMs tend to rely on retrieved information when formulating responses , with the quality of these results significantly influencing their reliance. Overall, this research contributes valuable insights into how large language models navigate complex tasks requiring substantial factual knowledge and underscores the importance of retrieval augmentation in enhancing their performance . The code for replicating this study is accessible at https://github.com/RUCAIBox/LLM-Knowledge-Boundary.
Created on 30 Mar. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.