Forging Robust Cognition Resilience in Large Language Models: The Self-Correction Reflection Paradigm Against Input Perturbations
Source abstract
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have been widely used in real-world applications due to their ability to decipher and make sense of perturbed information. However, the performance of LLMs that suffered from input perturbations has not been fully analyzed. In this paper, we propose a self-correction reflection method inspired by human cognition to improve robustness and mitigate the impact of perturbations on LLM performance. Firstly, we analyze the vulnerabilities of tokenization in LLMs through empirical demonstrations, comparative analysis with human cognition, and theoretical investigation of perturbation susceptibility. Secondly, we imitate the correction of input information in the human brain, which is enhanced by the consistency principle, aiming to enable the model to correct the perturbation and reduce the impact on the final response. Finally, we conduct experiments to validate the method’s efficacy, demonstrating improved performance across multiple models and datasets. We introduce a new evaluation metric, Model-Specific Cosine Similarity (MSCS), to quantify how well a specific model understands perturbation text, providing a more comprehensive evaluation of different LLM architectures. Particularly for different types of perturbations, after applying self-correction reflection, the average MSCS improvement across all models reaches 10.88%, while the average ACC improvement is 10.22%. The study also underscores the need for more innovative tokenization techniques and architectural design to achieve human-like cognitive robustness. This study could pave the way for more reliable, adaptable, and intelligent language models capable of thriving in practical applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Topic Modeling · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Speech and dialogue systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Control and Computer Engineering, North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, China
Institute of Disaster Prevention, Xueyuan Street, Yanjiao High Tech Zone, Sanhe 065201, China
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation, China · Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities · Beijing Key Laboratory Program
References (45)
Show source-provided references
1. Sun, K., and Wang, R. (2024). Computational Sentence-level Metrics Predicting Human Sentence Comprehension. arXiv.
2. Salinas, A., and Morstatter, F. (2024, January 11–16). The Butterfly Effect of Altering Prompts: How Small Changes and Jailbreaks Affect Large Language Model Performance. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, Bangkok, Thailand.10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.275 ↗
3. AlKhamissi, B., Tuckute, G., Bosselut, A., and Schrimpf, M. (2024). Brain-like language processing via a shallow untrained multihead attention network. arXiv.
4. Goldstein, A., Ham, E., Nastase, S.A., Zada, Z., Grinstein-Dabus, A., Aubrey, B., Schain, M., Gazula, H., Feder, A., and Doyle, W. (2022). Correspondence between the layered structure of deep language models and temporal structure of natural language processing in the human brain. BioRxiv.10.1101/2022.07.11.499562 ↗
5. Computational neuroanatomy of speech production10.1038/nrn3158 ↗
6. Mizuno, A., Ly, M., and Aizenstein, H.J. (2018). A Homeostatic Model of Subjective Cognitive Decline. Brain Sci., 8.10.20944/preprints201811.0032.v1 ↗
7. Cao, Q., Kojima, T., Matsuo, Y., and Iwasawa, Y. (2023, January 6–10). Unnatural error correction: Gpt-4 can almost perfectly handle unnatural scrambled text. Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore.10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.550 ↗
8. Wu, H., Hong, H., Sun, L., Bai, X., and Pu, M. (2024). Harnessing Response Consistency for Superior LLM Performance: The Promise and Peril of Answer-Augmented Prompting. Electronics, 13.10.3390/electronics13234581 ↗
9. Qiu, J., Han, W., Zhu, J., Xu, M., Weber, D., Li, B., and Zhao, D. (2023, January 6–10). Can brain signals reveal inner alignment with human languages?. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023, Singapore.10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.120 ↗
10. Jiang, J., Benhamou, E., Waters, S., Johnson, J.C., Volkmer, A., Weil, R.S., Marshall, C.R., Warren, J.D., and Hardy, C.J. (2021). Processing of degraded speech in brain disorders. Brain Sci., 11.10.3390/brainsci11030394 ↗
11. Janzen, G., Haun, D.B., and Levinson, S.C. (2012). Tracking down abstract linguistic meaning: Neural correlates of spatial frame of reference ambiguities in language. PLoS ONE, 7.10.1371/journal.pone.0030657 ↗
12. Zeki, S., Hulme, O.J., Roulston, B., and Atiyah, M. (2008). The encoding of temporally irregular and regular visual patterns in the human brain. PLoS ONE, 3.10.1371/journal.pone.0002180 ↗
13. Context understanding in computer vision: A survey10.1016/j.cviu.2023.103646 ↗
14. Explaining the Sentence Superiority Effect and N400s Elicited by Words and Short Sentences with OB1-Reader10.5334/joc.358 ↗
15. Fault-tolerant neural networks from biological error correction codes10.1103/PhysRevE.110.054303 ↗
16. Chai, Y., Fang, Y., Peng, Q., and Li, X. (2024). Tokenization Falling Short: The Curse of Tokenization. arXiv.
17. Naveed, H., Khan, A.U., Qiu, S., Saqib, M., Anwar, S., Usman, M., Akhtar, N., Barnes, N., and Mian, A. (2023). A comprehensive overview of large language models. arXiv.
18. Gu, A., and Dao, T. (2023). Mamba: Linear-Time Sequence Modeling with Selective State Spaces. arXiv.
19. Dao, T., and Gu, A. (2024, January 21–27). Transformers are SSMs: Generalized Models and Efficient Algorithms Through Structured State Space Duality. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), Vienna, Austria.
20. Peng, B., Alcaide, E., Anthony, Q., Albalak, A., Arcadinho, S., Biderman, S., Cao, H., Cheng, X., Chung, M., and Derczynski, L. (2023, January 6–10). RWKV: Reinventing RNNs for the Transformer Era. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023, Singapore.10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.936 ↗
21. Bast, H., Hertel, M., and Mohamed, M.M. (2021, January 10–11). Tokenization Repair in the Presence of Spelling Errors. Proceedings of the 25th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, Online.10.18653/v1/2021.conll-1.22 ↗
22. Gupta, A., Blum, C., Choji, T., Fei, Y., Shah, S., Vempala, A., and Srikumar, V. (2023, January 9–14). Don’t Retrain, Just Rewrite: Countering Adversarial Perturbations by Rewriting Text. Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), Toronto, ON, Canada.10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.781 ↗
23. AI-Powered AOP: Enhancing Runtime Monitoring with Large Language Models and Statistical Learning
24. Song, H.H., Di Pietro, R., Alrabaee, S., Tubishat, M., Al-kfairy, M., and Alfandi, O. (2025). Identifying the Origins of Business Data Breaches Through CTC Detection. Network and System Security, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference, NSS 2024, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 20–22 November 2024, Springer.10.1007/978-981-96-3531-3 ↗
25. Alshattnawi, S., Shatnawi, A., AlSobeh, A.M., and Magableh, A.A. (2024). Beyond Word-Based Model Embeddings: Contextualized Representations for Enhanced Social Media Spam Detection. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14062254 ↗
26. Dominance of AI and Machine Learning Techniques in Hybrid Movie Recommendation System Applying Text-to-number Conversion and Cosine Similarity Approaches10.32996/jcsts.2024.6.1.10 ↗
27. Pal, S., Chang, M., and Iriarte, M.F. (2021, January 13–15). Summary generation using natural language processing techniques and cosine similarity. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications, Online.10.1007/978-3-030-96308-8_47 ↗
28. (2024). Qwen Team. Qwen2.5: A Party of Foundation Models. arXiv.
29. Yang, A., Yang, B., Hui, B., Zheng, B., Yu, B., Zhou, C., Li, C., Li, C., Liu, D., and Huang, F. (2024). Qwen2 Technical Report. arXiv.
30. GLM, T., Zeng, A., Xu, B., Wang, B., Zhang, C., Yin, D., Zhang, D., Rojas, D., Feng, G., and Zhao, H. (2024). Chatglm: A family of large language models from glm-130b to glm-4 all tools. arXiv.
31. Dubey, A., Jauhri, A., Pandey, A., Kadian, A., Al-Dahle, A., Letman, A., Mathur, A., Schelten, A., Yang, A., and Fan, A. (2024). The llama 3 herd of models. arXiv.
32. Zuo, J., Velikanov, M., Rhaiem, D.E., Chahed, I., Belkada, Y., Kunsch, G., and Hacid, H. (2024). Falcon mamba: The first competitive attention-free 7b language model. arXiv.
33. Zhang, J., and Ren, X. (2024, January 27–29). The Application and Comparison of Artificial Intelligence LLMs in Psychological Statistical Analysis. Proceedings of the 2024 2nd International Conference on Internet of Things and Cloud Computing Technology, Paris, France.10.1145/3702879.3702881 ↗
34. Precision Structuring of Free-Text Surgical Record for Enhanced Stroke Management: A Comparative Evaluation of Large Language Models10.2147/JMDH.S486449 ↗
35. Hendrycks, D., Burns, C., Basart, S., Zou, A., Mazeika, M., Song, D., and Steinhardt, J. (2021, January 4). Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations, Vienna, Austria.
36. Zhong, W., Cui, R., Guo, Y., Liang, Y., Lu, S., Wang, Y., Saied, A., Chen, W., and Duan, N. (2024, January 16–21). AGIEval: A Human-Centric Benchmark for Evaluating Foundation Models. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2024, Mexico City, Mexico.10.18653/v1/2024.findings-naacl.149 ↗
37. McDonald, D., Papadopoulos, R., and Benningfield, L. (2024). Reducing llm hallucination using knowledge distillation: A case study with mistral large and mmlu benchmark. Authorea Preprints.10.36227/techrxiv.171665607.76504195/v1 ↗
38. Liu, J., Cui, L., Liu, H., Huang, D., Wang, Y., and Zhang, Y. (2021, January 7–15). LogiQA: A challenge dataset for machine reading comprehension with logical reasoning. Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI’20, Yokohama, Japan.10.24963/ijcai.2020/501 ↗
39. From LSAT: The Progress and Challenges of Complex Reasoning10.1109/TASLP.2022.3164218 ↗
40. Evaluating and improving tool-augmented computation-intensive math reasoning
41. Is RoAsT tougher than StEAk?: The effect of case mixing on perception of multi-letter graphemes10.2298/PSI1001103H ↗
42. Letter form as a constraint for errors in neglect dyslexia and letter position dyslexia10.1155/2005/635634 ↗
43. Letters, Words, Sentences, and Reading10.5334/joc.396 ↗
44. Chiang, C.H., and Lee, H.y. (2023, January 9–14). Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?. Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), Toronto, ON, Canada.10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.870 ↗
45. Soni, N., Flek, L., Sharma, A., Yang, D., Hooker, S., and Schwartz, H.A. (2024). Human-Centered Design Recommendations for LLM-as-a-judge. 1st Human-Centered Large Language Modeling Workshop, Proceedings of the ACL 2024, Bangkok, Thailand, 15 August 2024, TBD.