Papers
arxiv:2407.06946

Self-Recognition in Language Models

Published on Jul 9
· Submitted by trdavidson on Jul 12
Authors:
,
,

Abstract

A rapidly growing number of applications rely on a small set of closed-source language models (LMs). This dependency might introduce novel security risks if LMs develop self-recognition capabilities. Inspired by human identity verification methods, we propose a novel approach for assessing self-recognition in LMs using model-generated "security questions". Our test can be externally administered to keep track of frontier models as it does not require access to internal model parameters or output probabilities. We use our test to examine self-recognition in ten of the most capable open- and closed-source LMs currently publicly available. Our extensive experiments found no empirical evidence of general or consistent self-recognition in any examined LM. Instead, our results suggest that given a set of alternatives, LMs seek to pick the "best" answer, regardless of its origin. Moreover, we find indications that preferences about which models produce the best answers are consistent across LMs. We additionally uncover novel insights on position bias considerations for LMs in multiple-choice settings.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter

spiderman-meme.jpg

Are language models capable of self-recognition?

A rapidly growing number of applications rely on just a few frontier language models (LMs). This dependency might introduce novel security risks if LMs develop self-recognition capabilities. Inspired by human verification methods, we assess self-recognition in LMs using model-generated "security questions". We use our test to examine self-recognition in ten of the most capable open- and closed-source LMs currently publicly available.

TL;DR:

  • Observe no evidence for consistent self-recognition in any of the LMs studied.
  • Fine-tuning stages might cause LMs to equate "self" with whatever is the "best" option given a set of alternatives.
  • Position bias is not fixed and differs strongly between LMs, which could have a profound impact on benchmarks using multiple-choice questions.

This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.

The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API

Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!

If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space

You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend

Sign up or log in to comment

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2407.06946 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2407.06946 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2407.06946 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 3