In this study, we investigate whether LLMs can be used to indicate if a study in the behavioural social sciences is replicable. Using a dataset of 14 previously replicated studies (9 successful, 5 unsuccessful), we evaluate the ability of both open-source (Llama 3 8B, Qwen 2 7B, Mistral 7B) and proprietary (GPT-4o) instruction-tuned LLMs to discriminate between replicable and non-replicable findings. We use LLMs to generate synthetic samples of responses from behavioural studies and estimate whether the measured effects support the original findings. When compared with human replication results for these studies, we achieve F1 values of up to $77\%$ with Mistral 7B, $67\%$ with GPT-4o and Llama 3 8B, and $55\%$ with Qwen 2 7B, suggesting their potential for this task. We also analyse how effect size calculations are affected by sampling temperature and find that low variance (due to temperature) leads to biased effect estimates.

Previous interpretations of language models (LMs) miss important distinctions in how these models process factual information. For example, given the query "Astrid Lindgren was born in" with the corresponding completion "Sweden", no difference is made between whether the prediction was based on having the exact knowledge of the birthplace of the Swedish author or assuming that a person with a Swedish-sounding name was born in Sweden. In this paper, we investigate four different prediction scenarios for which the LM can be expected to show distinct behaviors. These scenarios correspond to different levels of model reliability and types of information being processed - some being less desirable for factual predictions. To facilitate precise interpretations of LMs for fact completion, we propose a model-specific recipe called PrISM for constructing datasets with examples of each scenario based on a set of diagnostic criteria. We apply a popular interpretability method, causal tracing (CT), to the four prediction scenarios and find that while CT produces different results for each scenario, aggregations over a set of mixed examples may only represent the results from the scenario with the strongest measured signal. In summary, we contribute tools for a more granular study of fact completion in language models and analyses that provide a more nuanced understanding of how LMs process fact-related queries.

A central but unresolved aspect of problem-solving in AI is the capability to introduce and use abstractions, something humans excel at. Work in cognitive science has demonstrated that humans tend towards higher levels of abstraction when engaged in collaborative task-oriented communication, enabling gradually shorter and more information-efficient utterances. Several computational methods have attempted to replicate this phenomenon, but all make unrealistic simplifying assumptions about how abstractions are introduced and learned. Our method, Abstractions for Communicating Efficiently (ACE), overcomes these limitations through a neuro-symbolic approach. On the symbolic side, we draw on work from library learning for proposing abstractions. We combine this with neural methods for communication and reinforcement learning, via a novel use of bandit algorithms for controlling the exploration and exploitation trade-off in introducing new abstractions. ACE exhibits similar tendencies to humans on a collaborative construction task from the cognitive science literature, where one agent (the architect) instructs the other (the builder) to reconstruct a scene of block-buildings. ACE results in the emergence of an efficient language as a by-product of collaborative communication. Beyond providing mechanistic insights into human communication, our work serves as a first step to providing conversational agents with the ability for human-like communicative abstractions.

This paper examines the development of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) meta-debate in Sweden before and after the release of ChatGPT. From the perspective of agenda-setting theory, we propose that it is an elite outside of party politics that is leading the debate -- i.e. that the politicians are relatively silent when it comes to this rapid development. We also suggest that the debate has become more substantive and risk-oriented in recent years. To investigate this claim, we draw on an original dataset of elite-level documents from the early 2010s to the present, using op-eds published in a number of leading Swedish newspapers. By conducting a qualitative content analysis of these materials, our preliminary findings lend support to the expectation that an academic, rather than a political elite is steering the debate.

We investigate how combinations of Large Language Models (LLMs) and symbolic analyses can be used to synthesise specifications of C programs. The LLM prompts are augmented with outputs from two formal methods tools in the Frama-C ecosystem, Pathcrawler and EVA, to produce C program annotations in the specification language ACSL. We demonstrate how the addition of symbolic analysis to the workflow impacts the quality of annotations: information about input/output examples from Pathcrawler produce more context-aware annotations, while the inclusion of EVA reports yields annotations more attuned to runtime errors. In addition, we show that the method infers rather the programs intent than its behaviour, by generating specifications for buggy programs and observing robustness of the result against bugs.

We investigate the potential of large language models (LLMs) to disentangle text variables--to remove the textual traces of an undesired forbidden variable in a task sometimes known as text distillation and closely related to the fairness in AI and causal inference literature. We employ a range of various LLM approaches in an attempt to disentangle text by identifying and removing information about a target variable while preserving other relevant signals. We show that in the strong test of removing sentiment, the statistical association between the processed text and sentiment is still detectable to machine learning classifiers post-LLM-disentanglement. Furthermore, we find that human annotators also struggle to disentangle sentiment while preserving other semantic content. This suggests there may be limited separability between concept variables in some text contexts, highlighting limitations of methods relying on text-level transformations and also raising questions about the robustness of disentanglement methods that achieve statistical independence in representation space.

Transformer language models are neural networks used for a wide variety of tasks concerning natural language, including some that also require logical reasoning. However, a transformer model may easily learn spurious patterns in the data, short-circuiting actual reasoning. In this paper we investigate to what extent transformers can be trained to a) approximate reasoning in propositional logic while b) avoiding known reasoning shortcuts via spurious correlations in the training data. To do so, we use a dataset with known spurious correlation between truth and e.g. the number of rules in the problem. We augment the data with proofs, and train two models: a generative transformer, WP-BART, trained on problems and their whole proofs, and a neuro-symbolic model, SIP-BART, trained on individual proof steps and combining the generative transformer model BART with a symbolic proof checker. We find that SIP-BART succeeds in avoiding reasoning shortcuts, while WP-BART does not. For SIP-BART, we then identify a few remaining reasoning errors, not previously described in the literature, arising from using a pre-trained language model. These are qualitatively analysed to create a taxonomy of four different types of additional pitfalls.

Large Language Models (LLMs) make natural interfaces to factual knowledge, but their usefulness is limited by their tendency to deliver inconsistent answers to semantically equivalent questions. For example, a model might predict both "Anne Redpath passed away in Edinburgh." and "Anne Redpath's life ended in London." In this work, we identify potential causes of inconsistency and evaluate the effectiveness of two mitigation strategies: up-scaling and augmenting the LM with a retrieval corpus. Our results on the LLaMA and Atlas models show that both strategies reduce inconsistency while retrieval augmentation is considerably more efficient. We further consider and disentangle the consistency contributions of different components of Atlas. For all LMs evaluated we find that syntactical form and other evaluation task artifacts impact consistency. Taken together, our results provide a better understanding of the factors affecting the factual consistency of language models.

In this paper we take the first steps in studying a new approach to synthesis of efficient communication schemes in multi-agent systems, trained via reinforcement learning. We combine symbolic methods with machine learning, in what is referred to as a neuro-symbolic system. The agents are not restricted to only use initial primitives: reinforcement learning is interleaved with steps to extend the current language with novel higher-level concepts, allowing generalisation and more informative communication via shorter messages. We demonstrate that this approach allow agents to converge more quickly on a small collaborative construction task.

A key component of mathematical reasoning is the ability to formulate interesting conjectures about a problem domain at hand. In this paper, we give a brief overview of a theory exploration system called QuickSpec, which is able to automatically discover interesting conjectures about a given set of functions. QuickSpec works by interleaving term generation with random testing to form candidate conjectures. This is made tractable by starting from small sizes and ensuring that only terms that are irreducible with respect to already discovered conjectures are considered. QuickSpec has been successfully applied to generate lemmas for automated inductive theorem proving as well as to generate specifications of functional programs. We give an overview of typical use-cases of QuickSpec, as well as demonstrating how to easily connect it to a theorem prover of the user's choice.