In our era of rapid technological advancement, the research landscape for writing assistants has become increasingly fragmented across various research communities. We seek to address this challenge by proposing a design space as a structured way to examine and explore the multidimensional space of intelligent and interactive writing assistants. Through a large community collaboration, we explore five aspects of writing assistants: task, user, technology, interaction, and ecosystem. Within each aspect, we define dimensions (i.e., fundamental components of an aspect) and codes (i.e., potential options for each dimension) by systematically reviewing 115 papers. Our design space aims to offer researchers and designers a practical tool to navigate, comprehend, and compare the various possibilities of writing assistants, and aid in the envisioning and design of new writing assistants.
Transformer-based models have made remarkable advancements in various NLP areas. Nevertheless, these models often exhibit vulnerabilities when confronted with adversarial attacks. In this paper, we explore the effect of quantization on the robustness of Transformer-based models. Quantization usually involves mapping a high-precision real number to a lower-precision value, aiming at reducing the size of the model at hand. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first application of quantization on the robustness of NLP models. In our experiments, we evaluate the impact of quantization on BERT and DistilBERT models in text classification using SST-2, Emotion, and MR datasets. We also evaluate the performance of these models against TextFooler, PWWS, and PSO adversarial attacks. Our findings show that quantization significantly improves (by an average of 18.68%) the adversarial accuracy of the models. Furthermore, we compare the effect of quantization versus that of the adversarial training approach on robustness. Our experiments indicate that quantization increases the robustness of the model by 18.80% on average compared to adversarial training without imposing any extra computational overhead during training. Therefore, our results highlight the effectiveness of quantization in improving the robustness of NLP models.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly utilized in educational tasks such as providing writing suggestions to students. Despite their potential, LLMs are known to harbor inherent biases which may negatively impact learners. Previous studies have investigated bias in models and data representations separately, neglecting the potential impact of LLM bias on human writing. In this paper, we investigate how bias transfers through an AI writing support pipeline. We conduct a large-scale user study with 231 students writing business case peer reviews in German. Students are divided into five groups with different levels of writing support: one classroom group with feature-based suggestions and four groups recruited from Prolific -- a control group with no assistance, two groups with suggestions from fine-tuned GPT-2 and GPT-3 models, and one group with suggestions from pre-trained GPT-3.5. Using GenBit gender bias analysis, Word Embedding Association Tests (WEAT), and Sentence Embedding Association Test (SEAT) we evaluate the gender bias at various stages of the pipeline: in model embeddings, in suggestions generated by the models, and in reviews written by students. Our results demonstrate that there is no significant difference in gender bias between the resulting peer reviews of groups with and without LLM suggestions. Our research is therefore optimistic about the use of AI writing support in the classroom, showcasing a context where bias in LLMs does not transfer to students' responses.