Conférence d'ouverture | Créer une IA plus sécuritaire pour la santé mentale des jeunes
Le 16 mars prochain à 9h, prenez part à cet événement qui réunira des chercheur·euse·s de premier plan en IA, des expert·e·s cliniques, et des voix du terrain pour discuter des cadres nécessaires à la conception d’une IA qui soit performante et sécuritaire en santé mentale.
TRAIL : IA responsable pour les professionnels et les leaders
Apprenez à intégrer des pratique d'IA responsable dans votre organisation avec le programme TRAIL. Inscrivez-vous à la séance d'information le 12 mars prochain pour en apprendre plus sur le programme.
Nous utilisons des témoins pour analyser le trafic et l’utilisation de notre site web, afin de personnaliser votre expérience. Vous pouvez désactiver ces technologies à tout moment, mais cela peut restreindre certaines fonctionnalités du site. Consultez notre Politique de protection de la vie privée pour en savoir plus.
Paramètre des cookies
Vous pouvez activer et désactiver les types de cookies que vous souhaitez accepter. Cependant certains choix que vous ferez pourraient affecter les services proposés sur nos sites (ex : suggestions, annonces personnalisées, etc.).
Cookies essentiels
Ces cookies sont nécessaires au fonctionnement du site et ne peuvent être désactivés. (Toujours actif)
Cookies analyse
Acceptez-vous l'utilisation de cookies pour mesurer l'audience de nos sites ?
Lecteur Multimédia
Acceptez-vous l'utilisation de cookies pour afficher et vous permettre de regarder les contenus vidéo hébergés par nos partenaires (YouTube, etc.) ?
Large language models (LLMs) are known to "hallucinate" by generating false or misleading outputs. Hallucinations pose various harms, from e… (voir plus)rosion of trust to widespread misinformation. Existing hallucination evaluation, however, focuses only on "correctness" and often overlooks "consistency", necessary to distinguish and address these harms. To bridge this gap, we introduce _prompt multiplicity_, a framework for quantifying consistency through prompt sensitivity. Our analysis reveals significant multiplicity (over 50% inconsistency in benchmarks like Med-HALT), suggesting that hallucination-related harms have been severely underestimated. Furthermore, we study the role of consistency in hallucination detection and mitigation. We find that: (a) detection techniques capture consistency, not correctness, and (b) mitigation techniques like RAG can introduce additional inconsistencies. By integrating prompt multiplicity into hallucination evaluation, we provide an improved framework of potential harms and uncover critical limitations in current detection and mitigation strategies.
Large language models (LLMs) are known to "hallucinate" by generating false or misleading outputs. Existing hallucination benchmarks often o… (voir plus)verlook prompt sensitivity, due to stable accuracy scores despite prompt variations. However, such stability can be misleading. In this work, we introduce prompt multiplicity--the multiplicity of individual hallucinations depending on the input prompt--and study its role in LLM hallucination benchmarks. We find severe multiplicity, with even more than 50% of responses changing between correct and incorrect answers simply based on the prompt for certain benchmarks, like Med-HALT. Prompt multiplicity also gives us the lens to distinguish between randomness in generation and consistent factual inaccuracies, providing a more nuanced understanding of LLM hallucinations and their real-world harms. By situating our discussion within existing hallucination taxonomies--supporting their quantification--and exploring its relationship with uncertainty in generation, we highlight how prompt multiplicity fills a critical gap in the literature on LLM hallucinations.
Language models are prone to memorizing their training data, making them vulnerable to extraction attacks. While existing research often exa… (voir plus)mines isolated setups, such as a single model or a fixed prompt, real-world adversaries have a considerably larger attack surface due to access to models across various sizes and checkpoints, and repeated prompting. In this paper, we revisit extraction attacks from an adversarial perspective -- with multi-faceted access to the underlying data. We find significant churn in extraction trends, i.e., even unintuitive changes to the prompt, or targeting smaller models and earlier checkpoints, can extract distinct information. By combining multiple attacks, our adversary doubles (
Model multiplicity, the phenomenon where multiple models achieve similar performance despite different underlying learned functions, introdu… (voir plus)ces arbitrariness in model selection. While this arbitrariness may seem inconsequential in expectation, its impact on individuals can be severe. This paper explores various individual concerns stemming from multiplicity, including the effects of arbitrariness beyond final predictions, disparate arbitrariness for individuals belonging to protected groups, and the challenges associated with the arbitrariness of a single algorithmic system creating a monopoly across various contexts. It provides both an empirical examination of these concerns and a comprehensive analysis from the legal standpoint, addressing how these issues are perceived in the anti-discrimination law in Canada. We conclude the discussion with technical challenges in the current landscape of model multiplicity to meet legal requirements and the legal gap between current law and the implications of arbitrariness in model selection, highlighting relevant future research directions for both disciplines.