Tool Documentation Enables Zero-Shot Tool-Usage with Large Language Models

Today, large language models (LLMs) are taught to use new tools by providing a few demonstrations of the tool's usage. Unfortunately, demonstrations are hard to acquire, and can result in undesirable biased usage if the wrong demonstration is chosen. Even in the rare scenario that demonstrations are readily available, there is no principled selection protocol to determine how many and which ones to provide. As tasks grow more complex, the selection search grows combinatorially and invariably becomes intractable. Our work provides an alternative to demonstrations: tool documentation. We advocate the use of tool documentation, descriptions for the individual tool usage, over demonstrations. We substantiate our claim through three main empirical findings on 6 tasks across both vision and language modalities. First, on existing benchmarks, zero-shot prompts with only tool documentation are sufficient for eliciting proper tool usage, achieving performance on par with few-shot prompts. Second, on a newly collected realistic tool-use dataset with hundreds of available tool APIs, we show that tool documentation is significantly more valuable than demonstrations, with zero-shot documentation significantly outperforming few-shot without documentation. Third, we highlight the benefits of tool documentations by tackling image generation and video tracking using just-released unseen state-of-the-art models as tools. Finally, we highlight the possibility of using tool documentation to automatically enable new applications: by using nothing more than the documentation of GroundingDino, Stable Diffusion, XMem, and SAM, LLMs can re-invent the functionalities of the just-released Grounded-SAM and Track Anything models.

SugarCrepe: Fixing Hackable Benchmarks for Vision-Language Compositionality

In the last year alone, a surge of new benchmarks to measure compositional understanding of vision-language models have permeated the machine learning ecosystem. Given an image, these benchmarks probe a model's ability to identify its associated caption amongst a set of compositional distractors. Surprisingly, we find significant biases in all these benchmarks rendering them hackable. This hackability is so dire that blind models with no access to the image outperform state-of-the-art vision-language models. To remedy this rampant vulnerability, we introduce SugarCrepe, a new benchmark for vision-language compositionality evaluation. We employ large language models, instead of rule-based templates used in previous benchmarks, to generate fluent and sensical hard negatives, and utilize an adversarial refinement mechanism to maximally reduce biases. We re-evaluate state-of-the-art models and recently proposed compositionality inducing strategies, and find that their improvements were hugely overestimated, suggesting that more innovation is needed in this important direction. We release SugarCrepe and the code for evaluation at: https://github.com/RAIVNLab/sugar-crepe.

Distilling Step-by-Step! Outperforming Larger Language Models with Less Training Data and Smaller Model Sizes

Deploying large language models (LLMs) is challenging because they are memory inefficient and compute-intensive for practical applications. In reaction, researchers train smaller task-specific models by either finetuning with human labels or distilling using LLM-generated labels. However, finetuning and distillation require large amounts of training data to achieve comparable performance to LLMs. We introduce Distilling step-by-step, a new mechanism that (a) trains smaller models that outperform LLMs, and (b) achieves so by leveraging less training data needed by finetuning or distillation. Our method extracts LLM rationales as additional supervision for small models within a multi-task training framework. We present three findings across 4 NLP benchmarks: First, compared to both finetuning and distillation, our mechanism achieves better performance with much fewer labeled/unlabeled training examples. Second, compared to LLMs, we achieve better performance using substantially smaller model sizes. Third, we reduce both the model size and the amount of data required to outperform LLMs; our 770M T5 model outperforms the 540B PaLM model using only 80% of available data on a benchmark task.

Understanding Programmatic Weak Supervision via Source-aware Influence Function

Programmatic Weak Supervision (PWS) aggregates the source votes of multiple weak supervision sources into probabilistic training labels, which are in turn used to train an end model. With its increasing popularity, it is critical to have some tool for users to understand the influence of each component (e.g., the source vote or training data) in the pipeline and interpret the end model behavior. To achieve this, we build on Influence Function (IF) and propose source-aware IF, which leverages the generation process of the probabilistic labels to decompose the end model's training objective and then calculate the influence associated with each (data, source, class) tuple. These primitive influence score can then be used to estimate the influence of individual component of PWS, such as source vote, supervision source, and training data. On datasets of diverse domains, we demonstrate multiple use cases: (1) interpreting incorrect predictions from multiple angles that reveals insights for debugging the PWS pipeline, (2) identifying mislabeling of sources with a gain of 9%-37% over baselines, and (3) improving the end model's generalization performance by removing harmful components in the training objective (13%-24% better than ordinary IF).

Nemo: Guiding and Contextualizing Weak Supervision for Interactive Data Programming

Weak Supervision (WS) techniques allow users to efficiently create large training datasets by programmatically labeling data with heuristic sources of supervision. While the success of WS relies heavily on the provided labeling heuristics, the process of how these heuristics are created in practice has remained under-explored. In this work, we formalize the development process of labeling heuristics as an interactive procedure, built around the existing workflow where users draw ideas from a selected set of development data for designing the heuristic sources. With the formalism, we study two core problems of how to strategically select the development data to guide users in efficiently creating informative heuristics, and how to exploit the information within the development process to contextualize and better learn from the resultant heuristics. Building upon two novel methodologies that effectively tackle the respective problems considered, we present Nemo, an end-to-end interactive system that improves the overall productivity of WS learning pipeline by an average 20% (and up to 47% in one task) compared to the prevailing WS approach.

A Survey on Programmatic Weak Supervision

Labeling training data has become one of the major roadblocks to using machine learning. Among various weak supervision paradigms, programmatic weak supervision (PWS) has achieved remarkable success in easing the manual labeling bottleneck by programmatically synthesizing training labels from multiple potentially noisy supervision sources. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of recent advances in PWS. In particular, we give a brief introduction of the PWS learning paradigm, and review representative approaches for each component within PWS's learning workflow. In addition, we discuss complementary learning paradigms for tackling limited labeled data scenarios and how these related approaches can be used in conjunction with PWS. Finally, we identify several critical challenges that remain under-explored in the area to hopefully inspire future research directions in the field.

Active Refinement for Multi-Label Learning: A Pseudo-Label Approach

The goal of multi-label learning (MLL) is to associate a given instance with its relevant labels from a set of concepts. Previous works of MLL mainly focused on the setting where the concept set is assumed to be fixed, while many real-world applications require introducing new concepts into the set to meet new demands. One common need is to refine the original coarse concepts and split them into finer-grained ones, where the refinement process typically begins with limited labeled data for the finer-grained concepts. To address the need, we formalize the problem into a special weakly supervised MLL problem to not only learn the fine-grained concepts efficiently but also allow interactive queries to strategically collect more informative annotations to further improve the classifier. The key idea within our approach is to learn to assign pseudo-labels to the unlabeled entries, and in turn leverage the pseudo-labels to train the underlying classifier and to inform a better query strategy. Experimental results demonstrate that our pseudo-label approach is able to accurately recover the missing ground truth, boosting the prediction performance significantly over the baseline methods and facilitating a competitive active learning strategy.

Evaluations and Methods for Explanation through Robustness Analysis

Among multiple ways of interpreting a machine learning model, measuring the importance of a set of features tied to a prediction is probably one of the most intuitive ways to explain a model. In this paper, we establish the link between a set of features to a prediction with a new evaluation criterion, robustness analysis, which measures the minimum distortion distance of adversarial perturbation. By measuring the tolerance level for an adversarial attack, we can extract a set of features that provides the most robust support for a prediction, and also can extract a set of features that contrasts the current prediction to a target class by setting a targeted adversarial attack. By applying this methodology to various prediction tasks across multiple domains, we observe the derived explanations are indeed capturing the significant feature set qualitatively and quantitatively.

How Sensitive are Sensitivity-Based Explanations?

We propose a simple objective evaluation measure for explanations of a complex black-box machine learning model. While most such model explanations have largely been evaluated via qualitative measures, such as how humans might qualitatively perceive the explanations, it is vital to also consider objective measures such as the one we propose in this paper. Our evaluation measure that we naturally call sensitivity is simple: it characterizes how an explanation changes as we vary the test input, and depending on how we measure these changes, and how we vary the input, we arrive at different notions of sensitivity. We also provide a calculus for deriving sensitivity of complex explanations in terms of that for simpler explanations, which thus allows an easy computation of sensitivities for yet to be proposed explanations. One advantage of an objective evaluation measure is that we can optimize the explanation with respect to the measure: we show that (1) any given explanation can be simply modified to improve its sensitivity with just a modest deviation from the original explanation, and (2) gradient based explanations of an adversarially trained network are less sensitive. Perhaps surprisingly, our experiments show that explanations optimized to have lower sensitivity can be more faithful to the model predictions.