Unifying Corroborative and Contributive Attributions in Large Language Models

As businesses, products, and services spring up around large language models, the trustworthiness of these models hinges on the verifiability of their outputs. However, methods for explaining language model outputs largely fall across two distinct fields of study which both use the term "attribution" to refer to entirely separate techniques: citation generation and training data attribution. In many modern applications, such as legal document generation and medical question answering, both types of attributions are important. In this work, we argue for and present a unified framework of large language model attributions. We show how existing methods of different types of attribution fall under the unified framework. We also use the framework to discuss real-world use cases where one or both types of attributions are required. We believe that this unified framework will guide the use case driven development of systems that leverage both types of attribution, as well as the standardization of their evaluation.

Representation Matters: Assessing the Importance of Subgroup Allocations in Training Data

Collecting more diverse and representative training data is often touted as a remedy for the disparate performance of machine learning predictors across subpopulations. However, a precise framework for understanding how dataset properties like diversity affect learning outcomes is largely lacking. By casting data collection as part of the learning process, we demonstrate that diverse representation in training data is key not only to increasing subgroup performances, but also to achieving population level objectives. Our analysis and experiments describe how dataset compositions influence performance and provide constructive results for using trends in existing data, alongside domain knowledge, to help guide intentional, objective-aware dataset design.