Virtual environments play a key role in benchmarking advances in complex planning and decision-making tasks but are expensive and complicated to build by hand. Can current language models themselves serve as world simulators, correctly predicting how actions change different world states, thus bypassing the need for extensive manual coding? Our goal is to answer this question in the context of text-based simulators. Our approach is to build and use a new benchmark, called ByteSized32-State-Prediction, containing a dataset of text game state transitions and accompanying game tasks. We use this to directly quantify, for the first time, how well LLMs can serve as text-based world simulators. We test GPT-4 on this dataset and find that, despite its impressive performance, it is still an unreliable world simulator without further innovations. This work thus contributes both new insights into current LLM’s capabilities and weaknesses, as well as a novel benchmark to track future progress as new models appear.

In this work we investigate the capacity of language models to generate explicit, interpretable, and interactive world models of scientific and common-sense reasoning tasks. We operationalize this as a task of generating text games, expressed as hundreds of lines of Python code. To facilitate this task, we introduce ByteSized32, a corpus of 32 reasoning-focused text games totalling 20k lines of Python code. We empirically demonstrate that GPT-4 can use these games as templates for single-shot in-context learning, successfully producing runnable games on unseen topics in 28% of cases. When allowed to self-reflect on program errors, game runnability substantially increases to 58%. While evaluating simulation fidelity is labor intensive, we introduce a suite of automated metrics to assess game fidelity, technical validity, adherence to task specifications, and winnability, showing a high-degree of agreement with expert human ratings. We pose this as a challenge task to spur further development at the juncture of world modeling and code generation.

Each year, thousands of roughly 150-page parole hearing transcripts in California go unread because legal experts lack the time to review them. Yet, reviewing transcripts is the only means of public oversight in the parole process. To assist reviewers, we present a simple unsupervised technique for using language models (LMs) to identify procedural anomalies in long-form legal text. Our technique highlights unusual passages that suggest further review could be necessary. We utilize a contrastive perplexity score to identify passages, defined as the scaled difference between its perplexities from two LMs, one fine-tuned on the target (parole) domain, and another pre-trained on out-of-domain text to normalize for grammatical or syntactic anomalies. We present quantitative analysis of the results and note that our method has identified some important cases for review. We are also excited about potential applications in unsupervised anomaly detection, and present a brief analysis of results for detecting fake TripAdvisor reviews.