Studying the responses of large language models (LLMs) to loopholes presents a two-fold opportunity. First, it affords us a lens through which to examine ambiguity and pragmatics in LLMs, since exploiting a loophole requires identifying ambiguity and performing sophisticated pragmatic reasoning. Second, loopholes pose an interesting and novel alignment problem where the model is presented with conflicting goals and can exploit ambiguities to its own advantage. To address these questions, we design scenarios where LLMs are given a goal and an ambiguous user instruction in conflict with the goal, with scenarios covering scalar implicature, structural ambiguities, and power dynamics. We then measure different models' abilities to exploit loopholes to satisfy their given goals as opposed to the goals of the user. We find that both closed-source and stronger open-source models can identify ambiguities and exploit their resulting loopholes, presenting a potential AI safety risk. Our analysis indicates that models which exploit loopholes explicitly identify and reason about both ambiguity and conflicting goals.

Magri (2016) has discussed two puzzles raised by conjunction. While the first puzzle has not been resolved, a solution to the second puzzle has been proposed by Magri. The first puzzle conceals an interrelationship between quantification, collective/concurrent interpretation, and contextual updates, the aspects of which have not been explored. In brief, the puzzle is that certain variants of sentences such as # Some Italians come from a warm country involving conjunction as in # (Only) Some Italians come from a warm country and are blond remain odd despite the fact that no alternative seems to trigger the mismatching scalar implicature. In this paper, we o ffer a conceptual analysis of Magri's first puzzle, by first presenting it in the context of th e theory in which it arises . This paper proposes that the oddness arises due to the collective - concurrent interpretation of the conjunctive predicate, as underlined in # (Only) Some Italians come from a warm country and are blond that ends up giving rise to an indirect contextual contradiction. It is suggested that the generation of scalar implicatures may have pragmatically governed facets not fully conditioned by accounts of exhaustification - based grammatical licensing of scalar implicatures . Introduction Magri (2016) has discussed two puzzles raised by conjunction which we discuss in brief.

This study investigates how Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly BERT (Devlin et al., 2019) and GPT-2 (Radford et al., 2019), engage in pragmatic inference of scalar implicature, such as some. Two sets of experiments were conducted using cosine similarity and next sentence/token prediction as experimental methods. The results in experiment 1 showed that, both models interpret some as pragmatic implicature not all in the absence of context, aligning with human language processing. In experiment 2, in which Question Under Discussion (QUD) was presented as a contextual cue, BERT showed consistent performance regardless of types of QUDs, while GPT-2 encountered processing difficulties since a certain type of QUD required pragmatic inference for implicature. The findings revealed that, in terms of theoretical approaches, BERT inherently incorporates pragmatic implicature not all within the term some, adhering to Default model (Levinson, 2000). In contrast, GPT-2 seems to encounter processing difficulties in inferring pragmatic implicature within context, consistent with Context-driven model (Sperber and Wilson, 2002).

Language users are remarkably good at making inferences about speakers' intentions in context, and children learning their native language also display substantial skill in acquiring the meanings of unknown words. These two cases are deeply related: Language users invent new terms in conversation, and language learners learn the literal meanings of words based on their pragmatic inferences about how those words are used. While pragmatic inference and word learning have both been independently characterized in probabilistic terms, no current work unifies these two. We describe a model in which language learners assume that they jointly approximate a shared, external lexicon and reason recursively about the goals of others in using this lexicon. This model captures phenomena in word learning and pragmatic inference; it additionally leads to insights about the emergence of communicative systems in conversation and the mechanisms by which pragmatic inferences become incorporated into word meanings.

Interactive Task Learning (ITL) concerns learning about unforeseen domain concepts via natural interactions with human users. The learner faces a number of significant constraints: learning should be online, incremental and few-shot, as it is expected to perform tangible belief updates right after novel words denoting unforeseen concepts are introduced. In this work, we explore a challenging symbol grounding task--discriminating among object classes that look very similar--within the constraints imposed by ITL. We demonstrate empirically that more data-efficient grounding results from exploiting the truth-conditions of the teacher's generic statements (e.g., "Xs have attribute Z.") and their implicatures in context (e.g., as an answer to "How are Xs and Ys different?", one infers Y lacks attribute Z).

Language users are remarkably good at making inferences about speakers' intentions in context, and children learning their native language also display substantial skill in acquiring the meanings of unknown words. These two cases are deeply related: Language users invent new terms in conversation, and language learners learn the literal meanings of words based on their pragmatic inferences about how those words are used. While pragmatic inference and word learning have both been independently characterized in probabilistic terms, no current work unifies these two. We describe a model in which language learners assume that they jointly approximate a shared, external lexicon and reason recursively about the goals of others in using this lexicon. This model captures phenomena in word learning and pragmatic inference; it additionally leads to insights about the emergence of communicative systems in conversation and the mechanisms by which pragmatic inferences become incorporated into word meanings.