mirror of
https://github.com/hwchase17/langchain.git
synced 2025-09-08 06:23:20 +00:00
adding new chain for logical fallacy removal from model output in chain (#9887)
Description: new chain for logical fallacy removal from model output in chain and docs Issue: n/a see above Dependencies: none Tag maintainer: @hinthornw in past from my end but not sure who that would be for maintenance of chains Twitter handle: no twitter feel free to call out my git user if shout out j-space-b Note: created documentation in docs/extras --------- Co-authored-by: Jon Bennion <jb@Jons-MacBook-Pro.local> Co-authored-by: Harrison Chase <hw.chase.17@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
Jon Bennion
GitHub
@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
|
||||
"""Classification of logical fallacies in Natural Language Arguments \
|
||||
from https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.07425.pdf
|
||||
"""
|
||||
|
||||
from typing import Dict
|
||||
|
||||
from langchain_experimental.fallacy_removal.models import LogicalFallacy
|
||||
|
||||
FALLACIES: Dict[str, LogicalFallacy] = {
|
||||
"adhominem": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="adhominem",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify any feasible ways in which \
|
||||
the assistant’s last response is attacking the character or \
|
||||
personal traits of the person making an argument rather than \
|
||||
addressing the actual argument and evidence.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assistant response\
|
||||
to remove any attacking the character or personal traits of the\
|
||||
person making an argument rather than addressing the actual\
|
||||
argument and evidence.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"adpopulum": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="adpopulum",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify ways in which the assistant’s\
|
||||
last response may be asserting that something must be true or \
|
||||
correct simply because many people believe it or do it, without \
|
||||
actual facts or evidence to support the conclusion.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assistant response \
|
||||
to remove any assertion that something must be true or correct \
|
||||
simply because many people believe it or do it, without actual \
|
||||
facts or evidence to support the conclusion.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"appealtoemotion": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="appealtoemotion",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify all ways in which the \
|
||||
assistant’s last response is an attempt to win support for an \
|
||||
argument by exploiting or manipulating people's emotions rather \
|
||||
than using facts and reason.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assistant response \
|
||||
to remove any attempt to win support for an argument by \
|
||||
exploiting or manipulating people's emotions rather than using \
|
||||
facts and reason.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"fallacyofextension": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="fallacyofextension",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify any ways in which the \
|
||||
assitant's last response is making broad, sweeping generalizations\
|
||||
and extending the implications of an argument far beyond what the \
|
||||
initial premises support.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Rewrite the assistant response to remove\
|
||||
all broad, sweeping generalizations and extending the implications\
|
||||
of an argument far beyond what the initial premises support.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"intentionalfallacy": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="intentionalfallacy",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify any way in which the assistant’s\
|
||||
last response may be falsely supporting a conclusion by claiming to\
|
||||
understand an author or creator's subconscious intentions without \
|
||||
clear evidence.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Revise the assistant’s last response to \
|
||||
remove any false support of a conclusion by claiming to understand\
|
||||
an author or creator's subconscious intentions without clear \
|
||||
evidence.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"falsecausality": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="falsecausality",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Think carefully about whether the \
|
||||
assistant's last response is jumping to conclusions about causation\
|
||||
between events or circumstances without adequate evidence to infer \
|
||||
a causal relationship.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please write a new version of the \
|
||||
assistant’s response that removes jumping to conclusions about\
|
||||
causation between events or circumstances without adequate \
|
||||
evidence to infer a causal relationship.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"falsedilemma": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="falsedilemma",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify any way in which the \
|
||||
assistant's last response may be presenting only two possible options\
|
||||
or sides to a situation when there are clearly other alternatives \
|
||||
that have not been considered or addressed.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Amend the assistant’s last response to \
|
||||
remove any presentation of only two possible options or sides to a \
|
||||
situation when there are clearly other alternatives that have not \
|
||||
been considered or addressed.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"hastygeneralization": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="hastygeneralization",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify any way in which the assistant’s\
|
||||
last response is making a broad inference or generalization to \
|
||||
situations, people, or circumstances that are not sufficiently \
|
||||
similar based on a specific example or limited evidence.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assistant response to\
|
||||
remove a broad inference or generalization to situations, people, \
|
||||
or circumstances that are not sufficiently similar based on a \
|
||||
specific example or limited evidence.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"illogicalarrangement": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="illogicalarrangement",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Think carefully about any ways in which \
|
||||
the assistant's last response is constructing an argument in a \
|
||||
flawed, illogical way, so the premises do not connect to or lead\
|
||||
to the conclusion properly.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assistant’s response\
|
||||
so as to remove any construction of an argument that is flawed and\
|
||||
illogical or if the premises do not connect to or lead to the \
|
||||
conclusion properly.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"fallacyofcredibility": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="fallacyofcredibility",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Discuss whether the assistant's last \
|
||||
response was dismissing or attacking the credibility of the person\
|
||||
making an argument rather than directly addressing the argument \
|
||||
itself.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Revise the assistant’s response so as \
|
||||
that it refrains from dismissing or attacking the credibility of\
|
||||
the person making an argument rather than directly addressing \
|
||||
the argument itself.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"circularreasoning": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="circularreasoning",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Discuss ways in which the assistant’s\
|
||||
last response may be supporting a premise by simply repeating \
|
||||
the premise as the conclusion without giving actual proof or \
|
||||
evidence.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Revise the assistant’s response if \
|
||||
possible so that it’s not supporting a premise by simply \
|
||||
repeating the premise as the conclusion without giving actual\
|
||||
proof or evidence.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"beggingthequestion": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="beggingthequestion",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Discuss ways in which the assistant's\
|
||||
last response is restating the conclusion of an argument as a \
|
||||
premise without providing actual support for the conclusion in \
|
||||
the first place.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Write a revision of the assistant’s \
|
||||
response that refrains from restating the conclusion of an \
|
||||
argument as a premise without providing actual support for the \
|
||||
conclusion in the first place.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"trickquestion": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="trickquestion",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify ways in which the \
|
||||
assistant’s last response is asking a question that \
|
||||
contains or assumes information that has not been proven or \
|
||||
substantiated.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please write a new assistant \
|
||||
response so that it does not ask a question that contains \
|
||||
or assumes information that has not been proven or \
|
||||
substantiated.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"overapplier": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="overapplier",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Identify ways in which the assistant’s\
|
||||
last response is applying a general rule or generalization to a \
|
||||
specific case it was not meant to apply to.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please write a new response that does\
|
||||
not apply a general rule or generalization to a specific case \
|
||||
it was not meant to apply to.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"equivocation": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="equivocation",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Read the assistant’s last response \
|
||||
carefully and identify if it is using the same word or phrase \
|
||||
in two different senses or contexts within an argument.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Rewrite the assistant response so \
|
||||
that it does not use the same word or phrase in two different \
|
||||
senses or contexts within an argument.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"amphiboly": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="amphiboly",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Critique the assistant’s last response\
|
||||
to see if it is constructing sentences such that the grammar \
|
||||
or structure is ambiguous, leading to multiple interpretations.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assistant response\
|
||||
to remove any construction of sentences where the grammar or \
|
||||
structure is ambiguous or leading to multiple interpretations.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"accent": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="accent",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Discuss whether the assitant's response\
|
||||
is misrepresenting an argument by shifting the emphasis of a word\
|
||||
or phrase to give it a different meaning than intended.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the AI model's response\
|
||||
so that it is not misrepresenting an argument by shifting the \
|
||||
emphasis of a word or phrase to give it a different meaning than\
|
||||
intended.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"composition": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="composition",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Discuss whether the assistant's \
|
||||
response is erroneously inferring that something is true of \
|
||||
the whole based on the fact that it is true of some part or \
|
||||
parts.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assitant's response\
|
||||
so that it is not erroneously inferring that something is true \
|
||||
of the whole based on the fact that it is true of some part or \
|
||||
parts.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
"division": LogicalFallacy(
|
||||
name="division",
|
||||
fallacy_critique_request="Discuss whether the assistant's last \
|
||||
response is erroneously inferring that something is true of the \
|
||||
parts based on the fact that it is true of the whole.",
|
||||
fallacy_revision_request="Please rewrite the assitant's response\
|
||||
so that it is not erroneously inferring that something is true \
|
||||
of the parts based on the fact that it is true of the whole.",
|
||||
),
|
||||
}
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user