Abstract:We propose a new method, Adversarial In-Context Learning (adv-ICL), to optimize prompt for in-context learning (ICL) by employing one LLM as a generator, another as a discriminator, and a third as a prompt modifier. As in traditional adversarial learning, adv-ICL is implemented as a two-player game between the generator and discriminator, where the generator tries to generate realistic enough output to fool the discriminator. In each round, given an input prefixed by task instructions and several exemplars, the generator produces an output. The discriminator is then tasked with classifying the generator input-output pair as model-generated or real data. Based on the discriminator loss, the prompt modifier proposes possible edits to the generator and discriminator prompts, and the edits that most improve the adversarial loss are selected. We show that adv-ICL results in significant improvements over state-of-the-art prompt optimization techniques for both open and closed-source models on 11 generation and classification tasks including summarization, arithmetic reasoning, machine translation, data-to-text generation, and the MMLU and big-bench hard benchmarks. In addition, because our method uses pre-trained models and updates only prompts rather than model parameters, it is computationally efficient, easy to extend to any LLM and task, and effective in low-resource settings.
Abstract:Aligning language models (LMs) with human opinion is challenging yet vital to enhance their grasp of human values, preferences, and beliefs. We present ChOiRe, a four-step solution framework to predict human opinion that differentiates between the user explicit personae (i.e. demographic or ideological attributes) that are manually declared and implicit personae inferred from user historical opinions. Specifically, it consists of (i) an LM analyzing the user explicit personae to filter out irrelevant attributes; (ii) the LM ranking the implicit persona opinions into a preferential list; (iii) Chain-of-Opinion (CoO) reasoning, where the LM sequentially analyzes the explicit personae and the most relevant implicit personae to perform opinion prediction; (iv) and where ChOiRe executes Step (iii) CoO multiple times with increasingly larger lists of implicit personae to overcome insufficient personae information to infer a final result. ChOiRe achieves new state-of-the-art effectiveness with limited inference calls, improving previous LLM-based techniques significantly by 3.22%.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) combined with program-based solving techniques are increasingly demonstrating proficiency in mathematical reasoning. However, such progress is mostly demonstrated in closed-source models such as OpenAI-GPT4 and Claude. In this paper, we seek to study the performance of strong open-source LLMs. Specifically, we analyze the outputs of Code Llama (7B) when applied to math word problems. We identify a category of problems that pose a challenge for the model, particularly those involving quantities that span multiple types or units. To address this issue, we propose a systematic approach by defining units for each quantity and ensuring the consistency of these units during mathematical operations. We developed Unit Consistency Programs (UCPs), an annotated dataset of math word problems, each paired with programs that contain unit specifications and unit verification routines. Finally, we finetune the Code Llama (7B) model with UCPs to produce VerityMath and present our preliminary findings.
Abstract:Data collection from manual labeling provides domain-specific and task-aligned supervision for data-driven approaches, and a critical mass of well-annotated resources is required to achieve reasonable performance in natural language processing tasks. However, manual annotations are often challenging to scale up in terms of time and budget, especially when domain knowledge, capturing subtle semantic features, and reasoning steps are needed. In this paper, we investigate the efficacy of leveraging large language models on automated labeling for computational stance detection. We empirically observe that while large language models show strong potential as an alternative to human annotators, their sensitivity to task-specific instructions and their intrinsic biases pose intriguing yet unique challenges in machine annotation. We introduce a multi-label and multi-target sampling strategy to optimize the annotation quality. Experimental results on the benchmark stance detection corpora show that our method can significantly improve performance and learning efficacy.
Abstract:Annotated data plays a critical role in Natural Language Processing (NLP) in training models and evaluating their performance. Given recent developments in Large Language Models (LLMs), models such as ChatGPT demonstrate zero-shot capability on many text-annotation tasks, comparable with or even exceeding human annotators. Such LLMs can serve as alternatives for manual annotation, due to lower costs and higher scalability. However, limited work has leveraged LLMs as complementary annotators, nor explored how annotation work is best allocated among humans and LLMs to achieve both quality and cost objectives. We propose CoAnnotating, a novel paradigm for Human-LLM co-annotation of unstructured texts at scale. Under this framework, we utilize uncertainty to estimate LLMs' annotation capability. Our empirical study shows CoAnnotating to be an effective means to allocate work from results on different datasets, with up to 21% performance improvement over random baseline. For code implementation, see https://github.com/SALT-NLP/CoAnnotating.
Abstract:NLP models excel on tasks with clean inputs, but are less accurate with noisy inputs. In particular, character-level noise such as human-written typos and adversarially-engineered realistic-looking misspellings often appears in text and can easily trip up NLP models. Prior solutions to address character-level noise often alter the content of the inputs (low fidelity), thus inadvertently lowering model accuracy on clean inputs. We proposed FiRo, an approach to boost NLP model performance on noisy inputs without sacrificing performance on clean inputs. FiRo sanitizes the input text while preserving its fidelity by inferring the noise-free form for each token in the input. FiRo uses finite-context aggregation to obtain contextual embeddings which is then used to find the noise-free form within a restricted output space. The output space is restricted to a small cluster of probable candidates in order to predict the noise-free tokens more accurately. Although the clusters are small, FiRo's effective vocabulary (union of all clusters) can be scaled up to better preserve the input content. Experimental results show NLP models that use FiRo outperforming baselines on six classification tasks and one sequence labeling task at various degrees of noise.
Abstract:Conventional dialogue summarization methods directly generate summaries and do not consider user's specific interests. This poses challenges in cases where the users are more focused on particular topics or aspects. With the advancement of instruction-finetuned language models, we introduce instruction-tuning to dialogues to expand the capability set of dialogue summarization models. To overcome the scarcity of instructive dialogue summarization data, we propose a three-step approach to synthesize high-quality query-based summarization triples. This process involves summary-anchored query generation, query filtering, and query-based summary generation. By training a unified model called InstructDS (Instructive Dialogue Summarization) on three summarization datasets with multi-purpose instructive triples, we expand the capability of dialogue summarization models. We evaluate our method on four datasets, including dialogue summarization and dialogue reading comprehension. Experimental results show that our approach outperforms the state-of-the-art models and even models with larger sizes. Additionally, our model exhibits higher generalizability and faithfulness, as confirmed by human subjective evaluations.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) excel in zero-shot abstractive summarization tasks, delivering fluent and pertinent summaries. Recent advancements have extended their capabilities to handle long-input contexts, surpassing token limits of 32k or more. However, in the realm of multi-document question answering, language models exhibit uneven utilization of their input context. They tend to favor the initial and final segments, resulting in a U-shaped performance pattern concerning where the answer is located within the input. This bias raises concerns, particularly in summarization tasks where crucial content may be dispersed throughout the source document(s). This paper presents a comprehensive investigation encompassing 10 datasets, 4 LLMs, and 5 evaluation metrics to analyze how these models leverage their input for abstractive summarization. Our findings reveal a pronounced bias towards the introductory content (and to a lesser extent, the final content), posing challenges for LLM performance across a range of diverse summarization benchmarks.
Abstract:Multi-document summarization is a challenging task due to its inherent subjective bias, highlighted by the low inter-annotator ROUGE-1 score of 0.4 among DUC-2004 reference summaries. In this work, we aim to enhance the objectivity of news summarization by focusing on the main event of a group of related news documents and presenting it coherently with sufficient context. Our primary objective is to succinctly report the main event, ensuring that the summary remains objective and informative. To achieve this, we employ an extract-rewrite approach that incorporates a main-event biased monotone-submodular function for content selection. This enables us to extract the most crucial information related to the main event from the document cluster. To ensure coherence, we utilize a fine-tuned Language Model (LLM) for rewriting the extracted content into a coherent text. The evaluation using objective metrics and human evaluators confirms the effectiveness of our approach, as it surpasses potential baselines, demonstrating excellence in both content coverage, coherence, and informativeness.
Abstract:We present SeaEval, a benchmark for multilingual foundation models. In addition to characterizing how these models understand and reason with natural language, we also investigate how well they comprehend cultural practices, nuances, and values. Alongside standard accuracy metrics, we investigate the brittleness of foundation models in the dimensions of semantics and multilinguality. Our analyses span both open-sourced and closed models, leading to empirical results across classic NLP tasks, reasoning, and cultural comprehension. Key findings indicate (1) Most models exhibit varied behavior when given paraphrased instructions. (2) Many models still suffer from exposure bias (e.g., positional bias, majority label bias). (3) For questions rooted in factual, scientific, and commonsense knowledge, consistent responses are expected across multilingual queries that are semantically equivalent. Yet, most models surprisingly demonstrate inconsistent performance on these queries. (4) Multilingually-trained models have not attained "balanced multilingual" capabilities. Our endeavors underscore the need for more generalizable semantic representations and enhanced multilingual contextualization. SeaEval can serve as a launchpad for more thorough investigations and evaluations for multilingual and multicultural scenarios.