FaultProfIT: Hierarchical Fault Profiling of Incident Tickets in Large-scale Cloud Systems

Postmortem analysis is essential in the management of incidents within cloud systems, which provides valuable insights to improve system's reliability and robustness. At CloudA, fault pattern profiling is performed during the postmortem phase, which involves the classification of incidents' faults into unique categories, referred to as fault pattern. By aggregating and analyzing these fault patterns, engineers can discern common faults, vulnerable components and emerging fault trends. However, this process is currently conducted by manual labeling, which has inherent drawbacks. On the one hand, the sheer volume of incidents means only the most severe ones are analyzed, causing a skewed overview of fault patterns. On the other hand, the complexity of the task demands extensive domain knowledge, which leads to errors and inconsistencies. To address these limitations, we propose an automated approach, named FaultProfIT, for Fault pattern Profiling of Incident Tickets. It leverages hierarchy-guided contrastive learning to train a hierarchy-aware incident encoder and predicts fault patterns with enhanced incident representations. We evaluate FaultProfIT using the production incidents from CloudA. The results demonstrate that FaultProfIT outperforms state-of-the-art methods. Our ablation study and analysis also verify the effectiveness of hierarchy-guided contrastive learning. Additionally, we have deployed FaultProfIT at CloudA for six months. To date, FaultProfIT has analyzed 10,000+ incidents from 30+ cloud services, successfully revealing several fault trends that have informed system improvements.

Asclepius: A Spectrum Evaluation Benchmark for Medical Multi-Modal Large Language Models

The significant breakthroughs of Medical Multi-Modal Large Language Models (Med-MLLMs) renovate modern healthcare with robust information synthesis and medical decision support. However, these models are often evaluated on benchmarks that are unsuitable for the Med-MLLMs due to the intricate nature of the real-world diagnostic frameworks, which encompass diverse medical specialties and involve complex clinical decisions. Moreover, these benchmarks are susceptible to data leakage, since Med-MLLMs are trained on large assemblies of publicly available data. Thus, an isolated and clinically representative benchmark is highly desirable for credible Med-MLLMs evaluation. To this end, we introduce Asclepius, a novel Med-MLLM benchmark that rigorously and comprehensively assesses model capability in terms of: distinct medical specialties (cardiovascular, gastroenterology, etc.) and different diagnostic capacities (perception, disease analysis, etc.). Grounded in 3 proposed core principles, Asclepius ensures a comprehensive evaluation by encompassing 15 medical specialties, stratifying into 3 main categories and 8 sub-categories of clinical tasks, and exempting from train-validate contamination. We further provide an in-depth analysis of 6 Med-MLLMs and compare them with 5 human specialists, providing insights into their competencies and limitations in various medical contexts. Our work not only advances the understanding of Med-MLLMs' capabilities but also sets a precedent for future evaluations and the safe deployment of these models in clinical environments. We launch and maintain a leaderboard for community assessment of Med-MLLM capabilities (https://asclepius-med.github.io/).

Enhancing LLM-Based Coding Tools through Native Integration of IDE-Derived Static Context

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in code completion, as evidenced by their essential roles in developing code assistant services such as Copilot. Being trained on in-file contexts, current LLMs are quite effective in completing code for single source files. However, it is challenging for them to conduct repository-level code completion for large software projects that require cross-file information. Existing research on LLM-based repository-level code completion identifies and integrates cross-file contexts, but it suffers from low accuracy and limited context length of LLMs. In this paper, we argue that Integrated Development Environments (IDEs) can provide direct, accurate and real-time cross-file information for repository-level code completion. We propose IDECoder, a practical framework that leverages IDE native static contexts for cross-context construction and diagnosis results for self-refinement. IDECoder utilizes the rich cross-context information available in IDEs to enhance the capabilities of LLMs of repository-level code completion. We conducted preliminary experiments to validate the performance of IDECoder and observed that this synergy represents a promising trend for future exploration.

MTAD: Tools and Benchmarks for Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detection

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are essential time-series metrics for ensuring the reliability and stability of many software systems. They faithfully record runtime states to facilitate the understanding of anomalous system behaviors and provide informative clues for engineers to pinpoint the root causes. The unprecedented scale and complexity of modern software systems, however, make the volume of KPIs explode. Consequently, many traditional methods of KPI anomaly detection become impractical, which serves as a catalyst for the fast development of machine learning-based solutions in both academia and industry. However, there is currently a lack of rigorous comparison among these KPI anomaly detection methods, and re-implementation demands a non-trivial effort. Moreover, we observe that different works adopt independent evaluation processes with different metrics. Some of them may not fully reveal the capability of a model and some are creating an illusion of progress. To better understand the characteristics of different KPI anomaly detectors and address the evaluation issue, in this paper, we provide a comprehensive review and evaluation of twelve state-of-the-art methods, and propose a novel metric called salience. Particularly, the selected methods include five traditional machine learning-based methods and seven deep learning-based methods. These methods are evaluated with five multivariate KPI datasets that are publicly available. A unified toolkit with easy-to-use interfaces is also released. We report the benchmark results in terms of accuracy, salience, efficiency, and delay, which are of practical importance for industrial deployment. We believe our work can contribute as a basis for future academic research and industrial application.

The Earth is Flat? Unveiling Factual Errors in Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT are foundational in various applications due to their extensive knowledge from pre-training and fine-tuning. Despite this, they are prone to generating factual and commonsense errors, raising concerns in critical areas like healthcare, journalism, and education to mislead users. Current methods for evaluating LLMs' veracity are limited by test data leakage or the need for extensive human labor, hindering efficient and accurate error detection. To tackle this problem, we introduce a novel, automatic testing framework, FactChecker, aimed at uncovering factual inaccuracies in LLMs. This framework involves three main steps: First, it constructs a factual knowledge graph by retrieving fact triplets from a large-scale knowledge database. Then, leveraging the knowledge graph, FactChecker employs a rule-based approach to generates three types of questions (Yes-No, Multiple-Choice, and WH questions) that involve single-hop and multi-hop relations, along with correct answers. Lastly, it assesses the LLMs' responses for accuracy using tailored matching strategies for each question type. Our extensive tests on six prominent LLMs, including text-davinci-002, text-davinci-003, ChatGPT~(gpt-3.5-turbo, gpt-4), Vicuna, and LLaMA-2, reveal that FactChecker can trigger factual errors in up to 45\% of questions in these models. Moreover, we demonstrate that FactChecker's test cases can improve LLMs' factual accuracy through in-context learning and fine-tuning (e.g., llama-2-13b-chat's accuracy increase from 35.3\% to 68.5\%). We are making all code, data, and results available for future research endeavors.

A & B == B & A: Triggering Logical Reasoning Failures in Large Language Models

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have propelled Artificial Intelligence (AI) to new heights, enabling breakthroughs in various tasks such as writing assistance, code generation, and machine translation. A significant distinction of advanced LLMs, such as ChatGPT, is their demonstrated ability to "reason." However, evaluating the reasoning ability of LLMs remains a challenge as most existing evaluations focus on their accuracy on the downstream tasks rather than directly assessing their reasoning processes. Efforts have been made to develop benchmarks and metrics to assess reasoning in LLMs, but they suffer from data leakage or limited scope. In this paper, we introduce LogicAsker, an automatic approach that comprehensively evaluates and improves the logical reasoning abilities of LLMs under a set of atomic reasoning skills based on propositional and predicate logic. The results provide insights into LLMs' reasoning abilities and reveal the logical rules the LLMs did not learn well. We evaluate LogicAsker on six widely deployed LLMs, including GPT-3, ChatGPT, GPT-4, Bard, Vicuna, and Guanaco. The results show that test cases from LogicAsker can find logical reasoning failures in different LLMs with a rate of 25\% - 94\%. In addition, the test cases of LogicAsker can be further used to design demonstration examples for in-context learning, which effectively improves the logical reasoning ability of LLMs, e.g., 10\% for GPT-4. As far as we know, our work is the first to create prompts based on testing results to improve LLMs' formal reasoning ability effectively. All the code, data, and results will be released for reproduction and future research.

New Job, New Gender? Measuring the Social Bias in Image Generation Models

Image generation models can generate or edit images from a given text. Recent advancements in image generation technology, exemplified by DALL-E and Midjourney, have been groundbreaking. These advanced models, despite their impressive capabilities, are often trained on massive Internet datasets, making them susceptible to generating content that perpetuates social stereotypes and biases, which can lead to severe consequences. Prior research on assessing bias within image generation models suffers from several shortcomings, including limited accuracy, reliance on extensive human labor, and lack of comprehensive analysis. In this paper, we propose BiasPainter, a novel metamorphic testing framework that can accurately, automatically and comprehensively trigger social bias in image generation models. BiasPainter uses a diverse range of seed images of individuals and prompts the image generation models to edit these images using gender, race, and age-neutral queries. These queries span 62 professions, 39 activities, 57 types of objects, and 70 personality traits. The framework then compares the edited images to the original seed images, focusing on any changes related to gender, race, and age. BiasPainter adopts a testing oracle that these characteristics should not be modified when subjected to neutral prompts. Built upon this design, BiasPainter can trigger the social bias and evaluate the fairness of image generation models. To evaluate the effectiveness of BiasPainter, we use BiasPainter to test five widely-used commercial image generation software and models, such as stable diffusion and Midjourney. Experimental results show that 100\% of the generated test cases can successfully trigger social bias in image generation models.

Not All Countries Celebrate Thanksgiving: On the Cultural Dominance in Large Language Models

In this paper, we identify a cultural dominance issue within large language models (LLMs) due to the predominant use of English data in model training (e.g. ChatGPT). LLMs often provide inappropriate English-culture-related answers that are not relevant to the expected culture when users ask in non-English languages. To systematically evaluate the cultural dominance issue, we build a benchmark that consists of both concrete (e.g. holidays and songs) and abstract (e.g. values and opinions) cultural objects. Empirical results show that the representative GPT models suffer from the culture dominance problem, where GPT-4 is the most affected while text-davinci-003 suffers the least from this problem. Our study emphasizes the need for critical examination of cultural dominance and ethical consideration in their development and deployment. We show two straightforward methods in model development (i.e. pretraining on more diverse data) and deployment (e.g. culture-aware prompting) can significantly mitigate the cultural dominance issue in LLMs.

All Languages Matter: On the Multilingual Safety of Large Language Models

Safety lies at the core of developing and deploying large language models (LLMs). However, previous safety benchmarks only concern the safety in one language, e.g. the majority language in the pretraining data such as English. In this work, we build the first multilingual safety benchmark for LLMs, XSafety, in response to the global deployment of LLMs in practice. XSafety covers 14 kinds of commonly used safety issues across 10 languages that span several language families. We utilize XSafety to empirically study the multilingual safety for 4 widely-used LLMs, including both close-API and open-source models. Experimental results show that all LLMs produce significantly more unsafe responses for non-English queries than English ones, indicating the necessity of developing safety alignment for non-English languages. In addition, we propose several simple and effective prompting methods to improve the multilingual safety of ChatGPT by evoking safety knowledge and improving cross-lingual generalization of safety alignment. Our prompting method can significantly reduce the ratio of unsafe responses from 19.1% to 9.7% for non-English queries. We release our data at https://github.com/Jarviswang94/Multilingual_safety_benchmark.

Who is ChatGPT? Benchmarking LLMs' Psychological Portrayal Using PsychoBench

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently showcased their remarkable capacities, not only in natural language processing tasks but also across diverse domains such as clinical medicine, legal consultation, and education. LLMs become more than mere applications, evolving into assistants capable of addressing diverse user requests. This narrows the distinction between human beings and artificial intelligence agents, raising intriguing questions regarding the potential manifestation of personalities, temperaments, and emotions within LLMs. In this paper, we propose a framework, PsychoBench, for evaluating diverse psychological aspects of LLMs. Comprising thirteen scales commonly used in clinical psychology, PsychoBench further classifies these scales into four distinct categories: personality traits, interpersonal relationships, motivational tests, and emotional abilities. Our study examines five popular models, namely \texttt{text-davinci-003}, ChatGPT, GPT-4, LLaMA-2-7b, and LLaMA-2-13b. Additionally, we employ a jailbreak approach to bypass the safety alignment protocols and test the intrinsic natures of LLMs. We have made PsychoBench openly accessible via \url{https://github.com/CUHK-ARISE/PsychoBench}.