arXiv:2503.16022cs.CL2025-03中稿 · the 6th Workshop o…被引 5

让大模型自己纠错反而更差,揭示自修正机制的局限性

Corrective In-Context Learning: Evaluating Self-Correction in Large Language Models

  • 在提示中加入错误答案和正确修正,尝试让模型自我纠正
  • 实验显示纠错比例越高,分类准确率越低,性能反而下降
  • 结果表明自修正会干扰模型理解,适合研究模型内在机制的学者

上下文学习(ICL)已改变大语言模型在自然语言处理任务中的使用方式,通过无微调的标注示例实现少样本学习。尽管有效,ICL对复杂示例仍易出错。为提升ICL性能,本文提出校正式上下文学习(CICL),将模型的错误预测与真实修正一并纳入提示,旨在通过自纠正提高分类准确率。然而,大量实验在文本分类任务中表明,CICL始终表现劣于标准ICL,且提示中修正比例越高,性能越差。研究发现,CICL会因混淆信息破坏模型的任务理解,而非优化预测。此外,标准ICL中呈现更难示例也未提升性能,说明示例难度并非有效选择标准。本文通过揭示自修正机制的负面效应,为未来研究提供重要启示。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

In-context learning (ICL) has transformed the use of large language models (LLMs) for NLP tasks, enabling few-shot learning by conditioning on labeled examples without finetuning. Despite its effectiveness, ICL is prone to errors, especially for challenging examples. With the goal of improving the performance of ICL, we propose corrective in-context learning (CICL), an approach that incorporates a model's incorrect predictions alongside ground truth corrections into the prompt, aiming to enhance classification accuracy through self-correction. However, contrary to our hypothesis, extensive experiments on text classification tasks demonstrate that CICL consistently underperforms standard ICL, with performance degrading as the proportion of corrections in the prompt increases. Our findings indicate that CICL introduces confusion by disrupting the model's task understanding, rather than refining its predictions. Additionally, we observe that presenting harder examples in standard ICL does not improve performance, suggesting that example difficulty alone may not be a reliable criterion for effective selection. By presenting these negative results, we provide important insights into the limitations of self-corrective mechanisms in LLMs and offer directions for future research.

大模型上下文学习自纠错

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。