Necessary or Sufficient? Evaluating LLM Explanations With Behavioural Evidence· 必要还是充分?用行为证据评估LLM解释
LLM decision components that can operate within agent workflows often produce action-relevant recommendations or judgements together with explanations. Operators may use the named factors to monitor a system, diagnose errors, or decide when to escalate an output. Such use assumes that the explanations agree with the component's observable decision behaviour. We test two interpretations of the named factors: necessity, meaning that changing a factor would change the output, and sufficiency, meaning that retaining it while removing other changeable information would preserve the output. We evaluate these interpretations in two synthetic use cases: recommending advisors to clients and judging prompts for harmfulness or risk. Models return an output and the top three factors that most influenc
评估LLM解释的必要性和充分性
- 核心方法
- 通过合成用例测试解释因素的必要性和充分性
- 适合谁读
- LLM研究者、可解释性AI开发者
- 要解决的问题
- 验证LLM生成解释是否真实反映模型决策行为
- 关键实验
- 两个合成用例:推荐顾问和判断提示风险
- 主要贡献
- 提出了一种评估LLM解释有效性的方法
- 意义与局限
- 有助于提高LLM可解释性和信任度,但局限于合成环境测试