Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, trained in controlled environments, often struggle in real-world complexities. We propose a general framework for estimating domain complexity across diverse environments, like open-world learning and real-world applications. This framework distinguishes between intrinsic complexity (inherent to the domain) and extrinsic complexity (dependent on the AI agent). By analyzing dimensionality, sparsity, and diversity within these categories, we offer a comprehensive view of domain challenges. This approach enables quantitative predictions of AI difficulty during environment transitions, avoids bias in novel situations, and helps navigate the vast search spaces of open-world domains.
Recent progress in generative AI, including large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, has opened up significant opportunities in fields ranging from natural language processing to knowledge discovery and data mining. However, there is also a growing awareness that the models can be prone to problems such as making information up or `hallucinations', and faulty reasoning on seemingly simple problems. Because of the popularity of models like ChatGPT, both academic scholars and citizen scientists have documented hallucinations of several different types and severity. Despite this body of work, a formal model for describing and representing these hallucinations (with relevant meta-data) at a fine-grained level, is still lacking. In this paper, we address this gap by presenting the Hallucination Ontology or HALO, a formal, extensible ontology written in OWL that currently offers support for six different types of hallucinations known to arise in LLMs, along with support for provenance and experimental metadata. We also collect and publish a dataset containing hallucinations that we inductively gathered across multiple independent Web sources, and show that HALO can be successfully used to model this dataset and answer competency questions.
Entity Resolution (ER) is the problem of semi-automatically determining when two entities refer to the same underlying entity, with applications ranging from healthcare to e-commerce. Traditional ER solutions required considerable manual expertise, including feature engineering, as well as identification and curation of training data. In many instances, such techniques are highly dependent on the domain. With recent advent in large language models (LLMs), there is an opportunity to make ER much more seamless and domain-independent. However, it is also well known that LLMs can pose risks, and that the quality of their outputs can depend on so-called prompt engineering. Unfortunately, a systematic experimental study on the effects of different prompting methods for addressing ER, using LLMs like ChatGPT, has been lacking thus far. This paper aims to address this gap by conducting such a study. Although preliminary in nature, our results show that prompting can significantly affect the quality of ER, although it affects some metrics more than others, and can also be dataset dependent.
Efficiently finding doctors and locations is an important search problem for patients in the healthcare domain, for which traditional information retrieval methods tend not to work optimally. In the last ten years, knowledge graphs (KGs) have emerged as a powerful way to combine the benefits of gleaning insights from semi-structured data using semantic modeling, natural language processing techniques like information extraction, and robust querying using structured query languages like SPARQL and Cypher. In this short paper, we present a KG-based search engine architecture for robustly finding doctors and locations in the healthcare domain. Early results demonstrate that our approach can lead to significantly higher coverage for complex queries without degrading quality.
Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, have achieved impressive milestones in natural language processing (NLP). Despite their impressive performance, the models are known to pose important risks. As these models are deployed in real-world applications, a systematic understanding of different risks posed by these models on tasks such as natural language inference (NLI), is much needed. In this paper, we define and formalize two distinct types of risk: decision risk and composite risk. We also propose a risk-centric evaluation framework, and four novel metrics, for assessing LLMs on these risks in both in-domain and out-of-domain settings. Finally, we propose a risk-adjusted calibration method called DwD for helping LLMs minimize these risks in an overall NLI architecture. Detailed experiments, using four NLI benchmarks, three baselines and two LLMs, including ChatGPT, show both the practical utility of the evaluation framework, and the efficacy of DwD in reducing decision and composite risk. For instance, when using DwD, an underlying LLM is able to address an extra 20.1% of low-risk inference tasks (but which the LLM erroneously deems high-risk without risk adjustment) and skip a further 19.8% of high-risk tasks, which would have been answered incorrectly.
Entity Resolution (ER) is the problem of determining when two entities refer to the same underlying entity. The problem has been studied for over 50 years, and most recently, has taken on new importance in an era of large, heterogeneous 'knowledge graphs' published on the Web and used widely in domains as wide ranging as social media, e-commerce and search. This chapter will discuss the specific problem of named ER in the context of personal knowledge graphs (PKGs). We begin with a formal definition of the problem, and the components necessary for doing high-quality and efficient ER. We also discuss some challenges that are expected to arise for Web-scale data. Next, we provide a brief literature review, with a special focus on how existing techniques can potentially apply to PKGs. We conclude the chapter by covering some applications, as well as promising directions for future research.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems planned for deployment in real-world applications frequently are researched and developed in closed simulation environments where all variables are controlled and known to the simulator or labeled benchmark datasets are used. Transition from these simulators, testbeds, and benchmark datasets to more open-world domains poses significant challenges to AI systems, including significant increases in the complexity of the domain and the inclusion of real-world novelties; the open-world environment contains numerous out-of-distribution elements that are not part in the AI systems' training set. Here, we propose a path to a general, domain-independent measure of domain complexity level. We distinguish two aspects of domain complexity: intrinsic and extrinsic. The intrinsic domain complexity is the complexity that exists by itself without any action or interaction from an AI agent performing a task on that domain. This is an agent-independent aspect of the domain complexity. The extrinsic domain complexity is agent- and task-dependent. Intrinsic and extrinsic elements combined capture the overall complexity of the domain. We frame the components that define and impact domain complexity levels in a domain-independent light. Domain-independent measures of complexity could enable quantitative predictions of the difficulty posed to AI systems when transitioning from one testbed or environment to another, when facing out-of-distribution data in open-world tasks, and when navigating the rapidly expanding solution and search spaces encountered in open-world domains.
We conduct a pilot study selectively evaluating the cognitive abilities (decision making and spatial reasoning) of two recently released generative transformer models, ChatGPT and DALL-E 2. Input prompts were constructed following neutral a priori guidelines, rather than adversarial intent. Post hoc qualitative analysis of the outputs shows that DALL-E 2 is able to generate at least one correct image for each spatial reasoning prompt, but most images generated are incorrect (even though the model seems to have a clear understanding of the objects mentioned in the prompt). Similarly, in evaluating ChatGPT on the rationality axioms developed under the classical Von Neumann-Morgenstern utility theorem, we find that, although it demonstrates some level of rational decision-making, many of its decisions violate at least one of the axioms even under reasonable constructions of preferences, bets, and decision-making prompts. ChatGPT's outputs on such problems generally tended to be unpredictable: even as it made irrational decisions (or employed an incorrect reasoning process) for some simpler decision-making problems, it was able to draw correct conclusions for more complex bet structures. We briefly comment on the nuances and challenges involved in scaling up such a 'cognitive' evaluation or conducting it with a closed set of answer keys ('ground truth'), given that these models are inherently generative and open-ended in responding to prompts.
In recent years, transformer-based language representation models (LRMs) have achieved state-of-the-art results on difficult natural language understanding problems, such as question answering and text summarization. As these models are integrated into real-world applications, evaluating their ability to make rational decisions is an important research agenda, with practical ramifications. This article investigates LRMs' rational decision-making ability through a carefully designed set of decision-making benchmarks and experiments. Inspired by classic work in cognitive science, we model the decision-making problem as a bet. We then investigate an LRM's ability to choose outcomes that have optimal, or at minimum, positive expected gain. Through a robust body of experiments on four established LRMs, we show that a model is only able to `think in bets' if it is first fine-tuned on bet questions with an identical structure. Modifying the bet question's structure, while still retaining its fundamental characteristics, decreases an LRM's performance by more than 25\%, on average, although absolute performance remains well above random. LRMs are also found to be more rational when selecting outcomes with non-negative expected gain, rather than optimal or strictly positive expected gain. Our results suggest that LRMs could potentially be applied to tasks that rely on cognitive decision-making skills, but that more research is necessary before they can robustly make rational decisions.
Acquiring commonsense knowledge and reasoning is an important goal in modern NLP research. Despite much progress, there is still a lack of understanding (especially at scale) of the nature of commonsense knowledge itself. A potential source of structured commonsense knowledge that could be used to derive insights is ConceptNet. In particular, ConceptNet contains several coarse-grained relations, including HasContext, FormOf and SymbolOf, which can prove invaluable in understanding broad, but critically important, commonsense notions such as 'context'. In this article, we present a methodology based on unsupervised knowledge graph representation learning and clustering to reveal and study substructures in three heavily used commonsense relations in ConceptNet. Our results show that, despite having an 'official' definition in ConceptNet, many of these commonsense relations exhibit considerable sub-structure. In the future, therefore, such relations could be sub-divided into other relations with more refined definitions. We also supplement our core study with visualizations and qualitative analyses.