{"title":"定义幻觉的陷阱","authors":"Kees van Deemter","doi":"10.1162/coli_a_00509","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite impressive advances in Natural Language Generation (NLG) and Large Language Models (LLMs), researchers are still unclear about important aspects of NLG evaluation. To substantiate this claim, I examine current classifications of hallucination and omission in Datatext NLG, and I propose a logic-based synthesis of these classfications. I conclude by highlighting some remaining limitations of all current thinking about hallucination and by discussing implications for LLMs.","PeriodicalId":49089,"journal":{"name":"Computational Linguistics","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Pitfalls of Defining Hallucination\",\"authors\":\"Kees van Deemter\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/coli_a_00509\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite impressive advances in Natural Language Generation (NLG) and Large Language Models (LLMs), researchers are still unclear about important aspects of NLG evaluation. To substantiate this claim, I examine current classifications of hallucination and omission in Datatext NLG, and I propose a logic-based synthesis of these classfications. I conclude by highlighting some remaining limitations of all current thinking about hallucination and by discussing implications for LLMs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49089,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computational Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computational Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00509\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00509","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite impressive advances in Natural Language Generation (NLG) and Large Language Models (LLMs), researchers are still unclear about important aspects of NLG evaluation. To substantiate this claim, I examine current classifications of hallucination and omission in Datatext NLG, and I propose a logic-based synthesis of these classfications. I conclude by highlighting some remaining limitations of all current thinking about hallucination and by discussing implications for LLMs.
期刊介绍:
Computational Linguistics is the longest-running publication devoted exclusively to the computational and mathematical properties of language and the design and analysis of natural language processing systems. This highly regarded quarterly offers university and industry linguists, computational linguists, artificial intelligence and machine learning investigators, cognitive scientists, speech specialists, and philosophers the latest information about the computational aspects of all the facets of research on language.