Knowledge claims are abundant in the literature on large language models (LLMs); but can we say that GPT-4 truly "knows" the Earth is round? To address this question, we review standard definitions of knowledge in epistemology and we formalize interpretations applicable to LLMs. In doing so, we identify inconsistencies and gaps in how current NLP research conceptualizes knowledge with respect to epistemological frameworks. Additionally, we conduct a survey of 100 professional philosophers and computer scientists to compare their preferences in knowledge definitions and their views on whether LLMs can really be said to know. Finally, we suggest evaluation protocols for testing knowledge in accordance to the most relevant definitions.

Recent studies have highlighted the presence of cultural biases in Large Language Models (LLMs), yet often lack a robust methodology to dissect these phenomena comprehensively. Our work aims to bridge this gap by delving into the Food domain, a universally relevant yet culturally diverse aspect of human life. We introduce FmLAMA, a multilingual dataset centered on food-related cultural facts and variations in food practices. We analyze LLMs across various architectures and configurations, evaluating their performance in both monolingual and multilingual settings. By leveraging templates in six different languages, we investigate how LLMs interact with language-specific and cultural knowledge. Our findings reveal that (1) LLMs demonstrate a pronounced bias towards food knowledge prevalent in the United States; (2) Incorporating relevant cultural context significantly improves LLMs' ability to access cultural knowledge; (3) The efficacy of LLMs in capturing cultural nuances is highly dependent on the interplay between the probing language, the specific model architecture, and the cultural context in question. This research underscores the complexity of integrating cultural understanding into LLMs and emphasizes the importance of culturally diverse datasets to mitigate biases and enhance model performance across different cultural domains.

Facts are subject to contingencies and can be true or false in different circumstances. One such contingency is time, wherein some facts mutate over a given period, e.g., the president of a country or the winner of a championship. Trustworthy language models ideally identify mutable facts as such and process them accordingly. We create MuLan, a benchmark for evaluating the ability of English language models to anticipate time-contingency, covering both 1:1 and 1:N relations. We hypothesize that mutable facts are encoded differently than immutable ones, hence being easier to update. In a detailed evaluation of six popular large language models, we consistently find differences in the LLMs' confidence, representations, and update behavior, depending on the mutability of a fact. Our findings should inform future work on the injection of and induction of time-contingent knowledge to/from LLMs.

Word order is an important concept in natural language, and in this work, we study how word order affects the induction of world knowledge from raw text using language models. We use word analogies to probe for such knowledge. Specifically, in addition to the natural word order, we first respectively extract texts of six fixed word orders from five languages and then pretrain the language models on these texts. Finally, we analyze the experimental results of the fixed word orders on word analogies and show that i) certain fixed word orders consistently outperform or underperform others, though the specifics vary across languages, and ii) the Wov2Lex hypothesis is not hold in pre-trained language models, and the natural word order typically yields mediocre results.

In this work, we conduct a detailed analysis on the performance of legal-oriented pre-trained language models (PLMs). We examine the interplay between their original objective, acquired knowledge, and legal language understanding capacities which we define as the upstream, probing, and downstream performance, respectively. We consider not only the models' size but also the pre-training corpora used as important dimensions in our study. To this end, we release a multinational English legal corpus (LeXFiles) and a legal knowledge probing benchmark (LegalLAMA) to facilitate training and detailed analysis of legal-oriented PLMs. We release two new legal PLMs trained on LeXFiles and evaluate them alongside others on LegalLAMA and LexGLUE. We find that probing performance strongly correlates with upstream performance in related legal topics. On the other hand, downstream performance is mainly driven by the model's size and prior legal knowledge which can be estimated by upstream and probing performance. Based on these findings, we can conclude that both dimensions are important for those seeking the development of domain-specific PLMs.