Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper explores how large language models (LLMs) utilize a difference-making logic to infer causal structures from text, challenging traditional causal inference frameworks. By analyzing the training processes and architectural features of LLMs, such as token embeddings and self-attention mechanisms, the author reveals that LLMs require extensive and diverse text data to identify causal relationships effectively. The findings suggest that LLMs' approach to causal inference mirrors experimental methods, providing insights into their underlying reasoning capabilities.
LLMs leverage a difference-making logic akin to experimental methods, reshaping our understanding of how they infer causal relationships from text.
Because large language models (LLMs) are impressively successful in predicting text, it appears that they must have access to a 'world model' representing causal and definitional structure. However, the dominant formalisms of modern causal inference -- Judea Pearl's interventionist approach and the Neyman-Rubin potential outcomes framework -- struggle to illuminate how LLMs learn causal structure. I resolve this puzzle by arguing that LLMs employ a specific inductive approach based on a difference-making logic -- sometimes called variational induction. I demonstrate how central aspects of this logic are realized during training, where LLMs require enormous amounts of text data from a wide range of contexts to identify difference- and indifference-makers within word sequences. Furthermore, I analyze specific architectural features of LLMs -- such as token embeddings and self-attention -- to determine their roles in variational induction. The difference-making logic of LLMs fundamentally parallels the experimental method, where causal relations are derived by systematically varying individual circumstances to determine their influence on a phenomenon.
