Abstract:Reasoning is a key ability for an intelligent system. Large language models (LMs) achieve above-chance performance on abstract reasoning tasks, but exhibit many imperfections. However, human abstract reasoning is also imperfect. For example, human reasoning is affected by our real-world knowledge and beliefs, and shows notable "content effects"; humans reason more reliably when the semantic content of a problem supports the correct logical inferences. These content-entangled reasoning patterns play a central role in debates about the fundamental nature of human intelligence. Here, we investigate whether language models $\unicode{x2014}$ whose prior expectations capture some aspects of human knowledge $\unicode{x2014}$ similarly mix content into their answers to logical problems. We explored this question across three logical reasoning tasks: natural language inference, judging the logical validity of syllogisms, and the Wason selection task. We evaluate state of the art large language models, as well as humans, and find that the language models reflect many of the same patterns observed in humans across these tasks $\unicode{x2014}$ like humans, models answer more accurately when the semantic content of a task supports the logical inferences. These parallels are reflected both in answer patterns, and in lower-level features like the relationship between model answer distributions and human response times. Our findings have implications for understanding both these cognitive effects in humans, and the factors that contribute to language model performance.

Large pre-trained language models contain human-like biases of what is right and wrong to do

Generative Language Models Exhibit Social Identity Biases

Do Large Language Models Know What Humans Know?

From Bytes to Biases: Investigating the Cultural Self-Perception of Large Language Models

Speaking Multiple Languages Affects the Moral Bias of Language Models

AI AI Bias: Large Language Models Favor Their Own Generated Content

Turning large language models into cognitive models

The moral machine experiment on large language models

Large Language Models as Mirrors of Societal Moral Standards

Cognitive bias in large language models: Cautious optimism meets anti-Panglossian meliorism

Large Language Models are Biased Because They Are Large Language Models

Language models show human-like content effects on reasoning tasks

Do Large Language Models Perform the Way People Expect? Measuring the Human Generalization Function

Large Language Models are biased to overestimate profoundness

Large Language Models Show Human-like Social Desirability Biases in Survey Responses

Large Language Models Assume People are More Rational than We Really are

Large Language Models Reflect the Ideology of their Creators

When Large Language Models contradict humans? Large Language Models' Sycophantic Behaviour

Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases

Large Language Models can Strategically Deceive their Users when Put Under Pressure

Instructed to Bias: Instruction-Tuned Language Models Exhibit Emergent Cognitive Bias