Training Language Models on the Knowledge Graph: Insights on Hallucinations and Their Detectability
Authors: Jiri Hron, Laura Culp, Gamaleldin Elsayed, Rosanne Liu, Ben Adlam, Maxwell Bileschi, Bernd Bohnet, JD Co-Reyes, Noah Fiedel, C. Daniel Freeman, Izzeddin Gur, Kathleen Kenealy, Jaehoon Lee, Peter J. Liu, Gaurav Mishra, Igor Mordatch, Azade Nova, Roman Novak, Aaron Parisi, Jeffrey Pennington, Alex Rizkowsky, Isabelle Simpson, Hanie Sedghi, Jascha Sohl-dickstein, Kevin Swersky, Sharad Vikram, Tris Warkentin, Lechao Xiao, Kelvin Xu, Jasper Snoek, Simon Kornblith
Abstract: While many capabilities of language models (LMs) improve with increased training budget, the influence of scale on hallucinations is not yet fully understood. Hallucinations come in many forms, and there is no universally accepted definition. We thus focus on studying only those hallucinations where a correct answer appears verbatim in the training set. To fully control the training data content, we construct a knowledge graph (KG)-based dataset, and use it to train a set of increasingly large LMs. We find that for a fixed dataset, larger and longer-trained LMs hallucinate less. However, hallucinating on $\leq5$% of the training data requires an order of magnitude larger model, and thus an order of magnitude more compute, than Hoffmann et al. (2022) reported was optimal. Given this costliness, we study how hallucination detectors depend on scale. While we see detector size improves performance on fixed LM's outputs, we find an inverse relationship between the scale of the LM and the detectability of its hallucinations.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
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.
Some bits of the article are not summarized yet, you can re-run the summarizing process by clicking on the Run button below.
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.