PreprintCited by 160Ethics and Social Impacts of AITopic ModelingExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Eight Things to Know about Large Language Models

Open access
Bowman, Samuel R.·2023·arXiv

Abstract

The widespread public deployment of large language models (LLMs) in recent months has prompted a wave of new attention and engagement from advocates, policymakers, and scholars from many fields. This attention is a timely response to the many urgent questions that this technology raises, but it can sometimes miss important considerations. This paper surveys the evidence for eight potentially surprising such points: 1. LLMs predictably get more capable with increasing investment, even without targeted innovation. 2. Many important LLM behaviors emerge unpredictably as a byproduct of increasing investment. 3. LLMs often appear to learn and use representations of the outside world. 4. There are no reliable techniques for steering the behavior of LLMs. 5. Experts are not yet able to interpret the inner workings of LLMs. 6. Human performance on a task isn't an upper bound on LLM performance. 7. LLMs need not express the values of their creators nor the values encoded in web text. 8. Brief interactions with LLMs are often misleading.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2304.00612

Cites

94 of 94 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • LLMs are known to be sensitive to textual instructions and inputs.

    “However, it is unclear how reliable LLMs are as evaluators, as they are known to be sensitive to textual instructions and inputs (Dong et al., 2022;Turpin et al., 2023;Bowman, 2023).”

    From Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators (2024) · cites this paper as Bowman, 2023

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

34 of the 128 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Bengio, Y., Goodfellow, I., and Courville, A. Deep learn- ing. MIT press Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017. ISBN 9780262035613.
  2. Hoffmann, J., Borgeaud, S., Mensch, A., Buchatskaya, E., Cai, T., Rutherford, E., de las Casas, D., Hendricks, L. A., Welbl, J., Clark, A., Hennigan, T., Noland, E., Millican, K., van den Driessche, G., Damoc, B., Guy, A., Osindero, S., Simonyan, K., Elsen, E., Vinyals, O., Rae, J. W., and Sifre, L. An empirical analysis of compute-optimal large language model training. In Oh, A. H., Agarwal, A., Belgrave, D., and Cho, K. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2022. URL https: //openreview.net/forum?id=iBBcRUlOAPR.
  3. Levesque, H., Davis, E., and Morgenstern, L. The Winograd schema challenge. In Thirteenth international conference on the principles of knowledge representation and rea- soning, 2012.
  4. Lipton, Z. C. The mythos of model interpretability: In machine learning, the concept of interpretability is both important and slippery. Queue, 16(3):31-57, 2018.
  5. Patel, R. and Pavlick, E. Mapping language models to grounded conceptual spaces. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bowman, S. R.
Corresponding author
Bowman, Samuel R.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Volume
2
Issue
2
ISSN
2834-703X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4410559688
Cited by
137
References
128
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 39 · 2021: 1
FWCI
40.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Critical AI (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (2046556, 1922658)
  • Open Philanthropy Project
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Keywords
large language models, emergent behavior, AI policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review