How Reliable are LLMs as Knowledge Bases? Re-thinking Facutality and Consistency

Danna Zheng, Mirella Lapata, Jeff Z. Pan
7/18/2024
cs.CLcs.AI

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly explored as knowledge bases (KBs), yet current evaluation methods focus too narrowly on knowledge retention, overlooking other crucial criteria for reliable performance. In this work, we rethink the requirements for evaluating reliable LLM-as-KB usage and highlight two essential factors: factuality, ensuring accurate responses to seen and unseen knowledge, and consistency, maintaining stable answers to questions about the same knowledge. We introduce UnseenQA, a dataset designed to assess LLM performance on unseen knowledge, and propose new criteria and metrics to quantify factuality and consistency, leading to a final reliability score. Our experiments on 26 LLMs reveal several challenges regarding their use as KBs, underscoring the need for more principled and comprehensive evaluation.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{zheng2024reliable,
  title  = {How Reliable are LLMs as Knowledge Bases? Re-thinking Facutality and Consistency},
  author = {Danna Zheng and Mirella Lapata and Jeff Z. Pan},
  year   = {2024},
  eprint = {2407.13578},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.13578v2}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2407.13578.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2407.13578)

Discussion