用大模型研究科学史哲社,既带来新工具也需警惕其隐含假设。
Large Language Models for History, Philosophy, and Sociology of Science: Interpretive Uses, Methodological Challenges, and Critical Perspectives
- 将大模型视为承载认知假设的基础设施,非中立工具
- 提出适配解释性研究的微调与检索增强策略
- 强调学科自主构建数据集与评估标准的重要性
本文探讨大语言模型(LLMs)作为历史、哲学与社会学科学(HPSS)研究工具的应用。尽管LLMs在处理非结构化文本和上下文推断方面表现出色,打破了计算与解释方法的传统界限,但其背后蕴含的意义、上下文与相似性假设,皆受训练数据、架构及使用模式影响。我们主张,HPSS不仅可受益于其能力,更应批判性审视其认识论基础与基础设施影响。文章首先为非技术读者提供简明的LLM架构与训练范式导引,随后分析结合LLM的计算技术如何支持解释性研究,比较全上下文与生成式模型,提出领域适配策略(如持续预训练、微调、检索增强生成),并评估其在解释性探究中的优劣。最后总结四条整合建议:(1)模型选择涉及解释性权衡;(2)理解大模型是基础;(3)必须建立本学科专属基准与语料库;(4)大模型应辅助而非取代解释方法。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
This paper explores the use of large language models (LLMs) as research tools in the history, philosophy, and sociology of science (HPSS). LLMs are remarkably effective at processing unstructured text and inferring meaning from context, offering new affordances that challenge long-standing divides between computational and interpretive methods. This raises both opportunities and challenges for HPSS, which emphasizes interpretive methodologies and understands meaning as context-dependent, ambiguous, and historically situated. We argue that HPSS is uniquely positioned not only to benefit from LLMs' capabilities but also to interrogate their epistemic assumptions and infrastructural implications. To this end, we first offer a concise primer on LLM architectures and training paradigms tailored to non-technical readers. We frame LLMs not as neutral tools but as epistemic infrastructures that encode assumptions about meaning, context, and similarity, conditioned by their training data, architecture, and patterns of use. We then examine how computational techniques enhanced by LLMs, such as structuring data, detecting patterns, and modeling dynamic processes, can be applied to support interpretive research in HPSS. Our analysis compares full-context and generative models, outlines strategies for domain and task adaptation (e.g., continued pretraining, fine-tuning, and retrieval-augmented generation), and evaluates their respective strengths and limitations for interpretive inquiry in HPSS. We conclude with four lessons for integrating LLMs into HPSS: (1) model selection involves interpretive trade-offs; (2) LLM literacy is foundational; (3) HPSS must define its own benchmarks and corpora; and (4) LLMs should enhance, not replace, interpretive methods.
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。