Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2403.03288

Should We Fear Large Language Models? A Structural Analysis of the Human Reasoning System for Elucidating LLM Capabilities and Risks Through the Lens of Heidegger's Philosophy

Jianqiiu Zhang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In the rapidly evolving field of Large Language Models (LLMs), there is a critical need to thoroughly analyze their capabilities and risks. Central to our investigation are two novel elements. Firstly, it is the innovative parallels between the statistical patterns of word relationships within LLMs and Martin Heidegger's concepts of "ready-to-hand" and "present-at-hand," which encapsulate the utilitarian and scientific altitudes humans employ in interacting with the world. This comparison lays the groundwork for positioning LLMs as the digital counterpart to the Faculty of Verbal Knowledge, shedding light on their capacity to emulate certain facets of human reasoning. Secondly, a structural analysis of human reasoning, viewed through Heidegger's notion of truth as "unconcealment" is conducted This foundational principle enables us to map out the inputs and outputs of the reasoning system and divide reasoning into four distinct categories. Respective cognitive faculties are delineated, allowing us to place LLMs within the broader schema of human reasoning, thus clarifying their strengths and inherent limitations. Our findings reveal that while LLMs possess the capability for Direct Explicative Reasoning and Pseudo Rational Reasoning, they fall short in authentic rational reasoning and have no creative reasoning capabilities, due to the current lack of many analogous AI models such as the Faculty of Judgement. The potential and risks of LLMs when they are augmented with other AI technologies are also evaluated. The results indicate that although LLMs have achieved proficiency in some reasoning abilities, the aspiration to match or exceed human intellectual capabilities is yet unattained. This research not only enriches our comprehension of LLMs but also propels forward the discourse on AI's potential and its bounds, paving the way for future explorations into AI's evolving landscape.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jianqiiu Zhang. 2024-03-05. Should We Fear Large Language Models? A Structural Analysis of the Human Reasoning System for Elucidating LLM Capabilities and Risks Through the Lens of Heidegger's Philosophy. https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.03288

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Generating Interesting Scientific Ideas using Knowledge Graphs and LLMs: Evaluations with 100 Research Group Leaders

The rapid growth of scientific literature makes it increasingly challenging for researchers to identify novel and impactful ideas, especially across disciplines. Modern artificial intelligence (AI) systems offer new opportunities for scientific ideation, but how compelling are AI-generated ideas, and how can their quality be improved? Here, we introduce SciMuse, which generates personalized research ideas using a knowledge graph of 58 million papers and a large language model (LLM). A central focus of this work is to understand how interesting these ideas are. Therefore, we conducted a large-scale evaluation in which more than 100 research group leaders -- spanning the natural sciences to the humanities -- rated over 4,400 personalized ideas according to their level of interest. Overall, expert ratings were modest (mean 2.40 on a 5-point scale, most common rating 1), while 24.9% of ideas were rated 4 or 5. We find that supplying concept pairs selected using the knowledge graph does not improve expert-rated interest over a titles-only GPT baseline. High-citation-predicted pairs even showed a weak tendency (1.94$σ$) toward lower interest than random pairs. Nevertheless, graph features can be used to control properties of ideas, and, using this unique evaluation dataset, we show that idea interest can be predicted with both a supervised neural network based on graph features and a zero-shot ranking approach based on an LLM. Our work provides an AI methodology for generating scientific ideas and a large-scale interdisciplinary expert evaluation, paving the way to study and improve difficult-to-measure metrics such as expert-perceived scientific interestingness.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

LOGIC: Efficient and Robust Contextual Biasing for Speech LLMs via Logit-Space Integration

Recognizing entity phrases remains a critical challenge for speech large language models. Existing prompting methods lack an explicit decoding-time biasing weight, limiting their controllability. Generative error correction methods can introduce hallucinated over-corrections. To address these limitations, we propose LOGIC (logit-space integration for contextual biasing), a robust framework operating directly in the logit space. By decoupling context injection from input processing, LOGIC enables explicit control over the biasing strength. Extensive experiments with an open-source speech large language model across 11 locales demonstrate that LOGIC achieves an average 9% relative reduction in entity word error rate, with an average false alarm rate increase of 0.3% and a 2.8% relative runtime overhead. When combined with prompting, LOGIC can reduce entity word error rate by 5% relative to the prompt-only method.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Decoding ML Decision: An Agentic Reasoning Framework for Large-Scale Ranking System

Modern large-scale ranking systems operate within a sophisticated landscape of competing objectives, operational constraints, and evolving product requirements. Progress in this domain is increasingly bottlenecked by the engineering context constraint: the arduous process of translating ambiguous product intent into reasonable, executable, verifiable hypotheses, rather than by modeling techniques alone. We present GEARS (Generative Engine for Agentic Ranking Systems), a framework that reframes ranking optimization as an autonomous discovery process within a programmable experimentation environment. Rather than treating optimization as static model selection, GEARS leverages Specialized Agent Skills to encapsulate ranking expert knowledge into reusable reasoning capabilities, enabling operators to steer systems via high-level intent vibe personalization. Furthermore, to ensure production reliability, the framework incorporates validation hooks to enforce statistical robustness and filter out brittle policies that overfit short-term signals. Experimental validation across diverse product surfaces demonstrates that GEARS consistently identifies superior, near-Pareto-efficient policies by synergizing algorithmic signals with deep ranking context while maintaining rigorous deployment stability.

cs.AI↗