Can Retriever-Augmented Language Models Reason? The Blame Game Between the Retriever and the Language Model

The emergence of large pretrained models has enabled language models to achieve superior performance in common NLP tasks, including language modeling and question answering, compared to previous static word representation methods. Augmenting these models with a retriever to retrieve the related text and documents as supporting information has shown promise in effectively solving NLP problems in a more interpretable way given that the additional knowledge is injected explicitly rather than being captured in the models' parameters. In spite of the recent progress, our analysis on retriever-augmented language models shows that this class of language models still lack reasoning over the retrieved documents. In this paper, we study the strengths and weaknesses of different retriever-augmented language models such as REALM, kNN-LM, FiD, ATLAS, and Flan-T5 in reasoning over the selected documents in different tasks. In particular, we analyze the reasoning failures of each of these models and study how the models' failures in reasoning are rooted in the retriever module as well as the language model.

Syntactic Substitutability as Unsupervised Dependency Syntax

Syntax is a latent hierarchical structure which underpins the robust and compositional nature of human language. An active line of inquiry is whether large pretrained language models (LLMs) are able to acquire syntax by training on text alone; understanding a model's syntactic capabilities is essential to understanding how it processes and makes use of language. In this paper, we propose a new method, SSUD, which allows for the induction of syntactic structures without supervision from gold-standard parses. Instead, we seek to define formalism-agnostic, model-intrinsic syntactic parses by using a property of syntactic relations: syntactic substitutability. We demonstrate both quantitative and qualitative gains on dependency parsing tasks using SSUD, and induce syntactic structures which we hope provide clarity into LLMs and linguistic representations, alike.

The Curious Case of Absolute Position Embeddings

Transformer language models encode the notion of word order using positional information. Most commonly, this positional information is represented by absolute position embeddings (APEs), that are learned from the pretraining data. However, in natural language, it is not absolute position that matters, but relative position, and the extent to which APEs can capture this type of information has not been investigated. In this work, we observe that models trained with APE over-rely on positional information to the point that they break-down when subjected to sentences with shifted position information. Specifically, when models are subjected to sentences starting from a non-zero position (excluding the effect of priming), they exhibit noticeably degraded performance on zero to full-shot tasks, across a range of model families and model sizes. Our findings raise questions about the efficacy of APEs to model the relativity of position information, and invite further introspection on the sentence and word order processing strategies employed by these models.

Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models

Language models demonstrate both quantitative improvement and new qualitative capabilities with increasing scale. Despite their potentially transformative impact, these new capabilities are as yet poorly characterized. In order to inform future research, prepare for disruptive new model capabilities, and ameliorate socially harmful effects, it is vital that we understand the present and near-future capabilities and limitations of language models. To address this challenge, we introduce the Beyond the Imitation Game benchmark (BIG-bench). BIG-bench currently consists of 204 tasks, contributed by 442 authors across 132 institutions. Task topics are diverse, drawing problems from linguistics, childhood development, math, common-sense reasoning, biology, physics, social bias, software development, and beyond. BIG-bench focuses on tasks that are believed to be beyond the capabilities of current language models. We evaluate the behavior of OpenAI's GPT models, Google-internal dense transformer architectures, and Switch-style sparse transformers on BIG-bench, across model sizes spanning millions to hundreds of billions of parameters. In addition, a team of human expert raters performed all tasks in order to provide a strong baseline. Findings include: model performance and calibration both improve with scale, but are poor in absolute terms (and when compared with rater performance); performance is remarkably similar across model classes, though with benefits from sparsity; tasks that improve gradually and predictably commonly involve a large knowledge or memorization component, whereas tasks that exhibit "breakthrough" behavior at a critical scale often involve multiple steps or components, or brittle metrics; social bias typically increases with scale in settings with ambiguous context, but this can be improved with prompting.

Few-shot Question Generation for Personalized Feedback in Intelligent Tutoring Systems

Existing work on generating hints in Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) focuses mostly on manual and non-personalized feedback. In this work, we explore automatically generated questions as personalized feedback in an ITS. Our personalized feedback can pinpoint correct and incorrect or missing phrases in student answers as well as guide them towards correct answer by asking a question in natural language. Our approach combines cause-effect analysis to break down student answers using text similarity-based NLP Transformer models to identify correct and incorrect or missing parts. We train a few-shot Neural Question Generation and Question Re-ranking models to show questions addressing components missing in the student answers which steers students towards the correct answer. Our model vastly outperforms both simple and strong baselines in terms of student learning gains by 45% and 23% respectively when tested in a real dialogue-based ITS. Finally, we show that our personalized corrective feedback system has the potential to improve Generative Question Answering systems.

FaithDial: A Faithful Benchmark for Information-Seeking Dialogue

The goal of information-seeking dialogue is to respond to seeker queries with natural language utterances that are grounded on knowledge sources. However, dialogue systems often produce unsupported utterances, a phenomenon known as hallucination. Dziri et al. (2022)'s investigation of hallucinations has revealed that existing knowledge-grounded benchmarks are contaminated with hallucinated responses at an alarming level (>60% of the responses) and models trained on this data amplify hallucinations even further (>80% of the responses). To mitigate this behavior, we adopt a data-centric solution and create FaithDial, a new benchmark for hallucination-free dialogues, by editing hallucinated responses in the Wizard of Wikipedia (WoW) benchmark. We observe that FaithDial is more faithful than WoW while also maintaining engaging conversations. We show that FaithDial can serve as a training signal for: i) a hallucination critic, which discriminates whether an utterance is faithful or not, and boosts the performance by 21.1 F1 score on the BEGIN benchmark compared to existing datasets for dialogue coherence; ii) high-quality dialogue generation. We benchmark a series of state-of-the-art models and propose an auxiliary contrastive objective that achieves the highest level of faithfulness and abstractiveness based on several automated metrics. Further, we find that the benefits of FaithDial generalize to zero-shot transfer on other datasets, such as CMU-Dog and TopicalChat. Finally, human evaluation reveals that responses generated by models trained on FaithDial are perceived as more interpretable, cooperative, and engaging.

On the Origin of Hallucinations in Conversational Models: Is it the Datasets or the Models?

Knowledge-grounded conversational models are known to suffer from producing factually invalid statements, a phenomenon commonly called hallucination. In this work, we investigate the underlying causes of this phenomenon: is hallucination due to the training data, or to the models? We conduct a comprehensive human study on both existing knowledge-grounded conversational benchmarks and several state-of-the-art models. Our study reveals that the standard benchmarks consist of >60% hallucinated responses, leading to models that not only hallucinate but even amplify hallucinations. Our findings raise important questions on the quality of existing datasets and models trained using them. We make our annotations publicly available for future research.

Using Interactive Feedback to Improve the Accuracy and Explainability of Question Answering Systems Post-Deployment

Most research on question answering focuses on the pre-deployment stage; i.e., building an accurate model for deployment. In this paper, we ask the question: Can we improve QA systems further \emph{post-}deployment based on user interactions? We focus on two kinds of improvements: 1) improving the QA system's performance itself, and 2) providing the model with the ability to explain the correctness or incorrectness of an answer. We collect a retrieval-based QA dataset, FeedbackQA, which contains interactive feedback from users. We collect this dataset by deploying a base QA system to crowdworkers who then engage with the system and provide feedback on the quality of its answers. The feedback contains both structured ratings and unstructured natural language explanations. We train a neural model with this feedback data that can generate explanations and re-score answer candidates. We show that feedback data not only improves the accuracy of the deployed QA system but also other stronger non-deployed systems. The generated explanations also help users make informed decisions about the correctness of answers. Project page: https://mcgill-nlp.github.io/feedbackqa/

Image Retrieval from Contextual Descriptions

The ability to integrate context, including perceptual and temporal cues, plays a pivotal role in grounding the meaning of a linguistic utterance. In order to measure to what extent current vision-and-language models master this ability, we devise a new multimodal challenge, Image Retrieval from Contextual Descriptions (ImageCoDe). In particular, models are tasked with retrieving the correct image from a set of 10 minimally contrastive candidates based on a contextual description. As such, each description contains only the details that help distinguish between images. Because of this, descriptions tend to be complex in terms of syntax and discourse and require drawing pragmatic inferences. Images are sourced from both static pictures and video frames. We benchmark several state-of-the-art models, including both cross-encoders such as ViLBERT and bi-encoders such as CLIP, on ImageCoDe. Our results reveal that these models dramatically lag behind human performance: the best variant achieves an accuracy of 20.9 on video frames and 59.4 on static pictures, compared with 90.8 in humans. Furthermore, we experiment with new model variants that are better equipped to incorporate visual and temporal context into their representations, which achieve modest gains. Our hope is that ImageCoDE will foster progress in grounded language understanding by encouraging models to focus on fine-grained visual differences.