Ruwan Wickramarachchi


2024

pdf bib
On the Relationship between Sentence Analogy Identification and Sentence Structure Encoding in Large Language Models
Thilini Wijesiriwardene | Ruwan Wickramarachchi | Aishwarya Naresh Reganti | Vinija Jain | Aman Chadha | Amit Sheth | Amitava Das
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL 2024

The ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to encode syntactic and semantic structures of language is well examined in NLP. Additionally, analogy identification, in the form of word analogies are extensively studied in the last decade of language modeling literature. In this work we specifically look at how LLMs’ abilities to capture sentence analogies (sentences that convey analogous meaning to each other) vary with LLMs’ abilities to encode syntactic and semantic structures of sentences. Through our analysis, we find that LLMs’ ability to identify sentence analogies is positively correlated with their ability to encode syntactic and semantic structures of sentences. Specifically, we find that the LLMs which capture syntactic structures better, also have higher abilities in identifying sentence analogies.

2023

pdf bib
ANALOGICAL - A Novel Benchmark for Long Text Analogy Evaluation in Large Language Models
Thilini Wijesiriwardene | Ruwan Wickramarachchi | Bimal Gajera | Shreeyash Gowaikar | Chandan Gupta | Aman Chadha | Aishwarya Naresh Reganti | Amit Sheth | Amitava Das
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023

Over the past decade, analogies, in the form of word-level analogies, have played a significant role as an intrinsic measure of evaluating the quality of word embedding methods such as word2vec. Modern large language models (LLMs), however, are primarily evaluated on extrinsic measures based on benchmarks such as GLUE and SuperGLUE, and there are only a few investigations on whether LLMs can draw analogies between long texts. In this paper, we present ANALOGICAL, a new benchmark to intrinsically evaluate LLMs across a taxonomy of analogies of long text with six levels of complexity – (i) word, (ii) word vs. sentence, (iii) syntactic, (iv) negation, (v) entailment, and (vi) metaphor. Using thirteen datasets and three different distance measures, we evaluate the abilities of eight LLMs in identifying analogical pairs in the semantic vector space. Our evaluation finds that it is increasingly challenging for LLMs to identify analogies when going up the analogy taxonomy.