paper
Human Adults and LLMs as Scientists: Who Benefits from Active Exploration?
paperactiveprovisional
human-adults-and-llms-as-scientists-who-benefits-from-active-exploration--7bb1eb8c·1 events·first seen 12d agoAliases: Human Adults and LLMs as Scientists: Who Benefits from Active Exploration?
More like this (12)
The Masked Advantage: Uncovering Local-Language Access to Cultural Knowledge in LLMsMeasuring Epistemic Resilience of LLMs Under Misleading Medical Contexthuman-LLM collaborative annotationSecurity and Privacy Prompts in the Wild: What Users Ask LLMs and How LLMs RespondCuriosity-Driven LearningExpRL: Exploratory RL for LLM Mid-Trainingfrontier LLMsLLM inferenceBeyond Third-Person Audits: Situated Interaction Auditing for User-Centered LLM Bias ResearchATLAS: Active Theory Learning for Automated ScienceLLM agentsRevising Context, Shifting Simulated Stance: Auditing LLM-Based Stance Simulation in Online Discussions
Recent events (1)
Study compares human and LLM active causal reasoning, finding LLMs less efficient but near human-level on conjunctive rules
A new arXiv paper investigates whether active exploration reduces the 'conjunctive handicap' in causal learning, using a blicket detector task with adult participants who could freely intervene to identify causal objects. Results show active exploration substantially improves human conjunctive causal reasoning, though conjunctive rules still require more tests than disjunctive ones. State-of-the-art LLMs approach human-level hypothesis inference accuracy but show less efficient exploration strategies and similar conjunctive-disjunctive performance gaps, raising questions about the nature of LLM causal reasoning.