Can Language Models Explain Their Own Classification Behavior?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) perform well at a myriad of tasks, but explaining the processes behind this performance is a challenge. This paper investigates whether LLMs can give faithful high-level explanations of their own internal processes. To explore this, we introduce a dataset, ArticulateRules, of few-shot text-based classification tasks generated by simple rules. Each rule is associated with a simple natural-language explanation. We test whether models that have learned to classify inputs competently (both in- and out-of-distribution) are able to articulate freeform natural language explanations that match their classification behavior. Our dataset can be used for both in-context and finetuning evaluations. We evaluate a range of LLMs, demonstrating that articulation accuracy varies considerably between models, with a particularly sharp increase from GPT-3 to GPT-4. We then investigate whether we can improve GPT-3's articulation accuracy through a range of methods. GPT-3 completely fails to articulate 7/10 rules in our test, even after additional finetuning on correct explanations. We release our dataset, ArticulateRules, which can be used to test self-explanation for LLMs trained either in-context or by finetuning.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 May 2024.
Builds on
28 of 46 references.
References · 28
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
- 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,302
- 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
- 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,122
16 more
- 2022Mass-Editing Memory in a Transformercited by 1,001
- 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
- 2023Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretabilitycited by 839
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 836
- 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 767
- 2022Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Wordscited by 751
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
- 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 530
- 2022Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluatorscited by 380
- 2022The Alignment Problem from a Deep Learning Perspectivecited by 258
- 2023Inverse Scaling: When Bigger Isn't Bettercited by 207
- 2023A Toy Model of Universality: Reverse Engineering How Networks Learn Group Operationscited by 144
- 2023Do Language Models Know When They're Hallucinating References?cited by 116
- 2021Truthful AI: Developing and governing AI that does not liecited by 113
- 2023Interpretability at Scale: Identifying Causal Mechanisms in Alpacacited by 103
- 2021RAFT: A Real-World Few-Shot Text Classification Benchmarkcited by 44
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.
- 2025Towards Automated Scoping of AI for Social Good Projectscited by 1
- 2025Towards Automated Scoping of AI for Social Good Projects28 Apr 2025