Beyond Persuasion: Towards Conversational Recommender System with Credible Explanations

With the aid of large language models, current conversational recommender system (CRS) has gaining strong abilities to persuade users to accept recommended items. While these CRSs are highly persuasive, they can mislead users by incorporating incredible information in their explanations, ultimately damaging the long-term trust between users and the CRS. To address this, we propose a simple yet effective method, called PC-CRS, to enhance the credibility of CRS's explanations during persuasion. It guides the explanation generation through our proposed credibility-aware persuasive strategies and then gradually refines explanations via post-hoc self-reflection. Experimental results demonstrate the efficacy of PC-CRS in promoting persuasive and credible explanations. Further analysis reveals the reason behind current methods producing incredible explanations and the potential of credible explanations to improve recommendation accuracy.

CARE: A Clue-guided Assistant for CSRs to Read User Manuals

It is time-saving to build a reading assistant for customer service representations (CSRs) when reading user manuals, especially information-rich ones. Current solutions don't fit the online custom service scenarios well due to the lack of attention to user questions and possible responses. Hence, we propose to develop a time-saving and careful reading assistant for CSRs, named CARE. It can help the CSRs quickly find proper responses from the user manuals via explicit clue chains. Specifically, each of the clue chains is formed by inferring over the user manuals, starting from the question clue aligned with the user question and ending at a possible response. To overcome the shortage of supervised data, we adopt the self-supervised strategy for model learning. The offline experiment shows that CARE is efficient in automatically inferring accurate responses from the user manual. The online experiment further demonstrates the superiority of CARE to reduce CSRs' reading burden and keep high service quality, in particular with >35% decrease in time spent and keeping a >0.75 ICC score.

PAGED: A Benchmark for Procedural Graphs Extraction from Documents

Automatic extraction of procedural graphs from documents creates a low-cost way for users to easily understand a complex procedure by skimming visual graphs. Despite the progress in recent studies, it remains unanswered: whether the existing studies have well solved this task (Q1) and whether the emerging large language models (LLMs) can bring new opportunities to this task (Q2). To this end, we propose a new benchmark PAGED, equipped with a large high-quality dataset and standard evaluations. It investigates five state-of-the-art baselines, revealing that they fail to extract optimal procedural graphs well because of their heavy reliance on hand-written rules and limited available data. We further involve three advanced LLMs in PAGED and enhance them with a novel self-refine strategy. The results point out the advantages of LLMs in identifying textual elements and their gaps in building logical structures. We hope PAGED can serve as a major landmark for automatic procedural graph extraction and the investigations in PAGED can offer insights into the research on logic reasoning among non-sequential elements.

Legend: Leveraging Representation Engineering to Annotate Safety Margin for Preference Datasets

The success of the reward model in distinguishing between responses with subtle safety differences depends critically on the high-quality preference dataset, which should capture the fine-grained nuances of harmful and harmless responses. This motivates the need to develop a dataset involving preference margins, which accurately quantify how harmless one response is compared to another. In this paper, we take the first step to propose an effective and cost-efficient framework to promote the margin-enhanced preference dataset development. Our framework, Legend, Leverages representation engineering to annotate preference datasets. It constructs the specific direction within the LLM's embedding space that represents safety. By leveraging this safety direction, Legend can then leverage the semantic distances of paired responses along this direction to annotate margins automatically. We experimentally demonstrate our effectiveness in both reward modeling and harmless alignment for LLMs. Legend also stands out for its efficiency, requiring only the inference time rather than additional training. This efficiency allows for easier implementation and scalability, making Legend particularly valuable for practical applications in aligning LLMs with safe conversations.

Dishonesty in Helpful and Harmless Alignment

People tell lies when seeking rewards. Large language models (LLMs) are aligned to human values with reinforcement learning where they get rewards if they satisfy human preference. We find that this also induces dishonesty in helpful and harmless alignment where LLMs tell lies in generating harmless responses. Using the latest interpreting tools, we detect dishonesty, show how LLMs can be harmful if their honesty is increased, and analyze such conflicts at the parameter-level. Given these preliminaries and the hypothesis that reward-seeking stimulates dishonesty, we theoretically show that the dishonesty can in-turn decrease the alignment performances and augment reward-seeking alignment with representation regularization. Extensive results, including GPT-4 annotated win-rates, perplexities, and cases studies demonstrate that we can train more honest, helpful, and harmless LLMs. We will make all our codes and results be open-sourced upon this paper's acceptance.

ARAIDA: Analogical Reasoning-Augmented Interactive Data Annotation

Human annotation is a time-consuming task that requires a significant amount of effort. To address this issue, interactive data annotation utilizes an annotation model to provide suggestions for humans to approve or correct. However, annotation models trained with limited labeled data are prone to generating incorrect suggestions, leading to extra human correction effort. To tackle this challenge, we propose Araida, an analogical reasoning-based approach that enhances automatic annotation accuracy in the interactive data annotation setting and reduces the need for human corrections. Araida involves an error-aware integration strategy that dynamically coordinates an annotation model and a k-nearest neighbors (KNN) model, giving more importance to KNN's predictions when predictions from the annotation model are deemed inaccurate. Empirical studies demonstrate that Araida is adaptable to different annotation tasks and models. On average, it reduces human correction labor by 11.02% compared to vanilla interactive data annotation methods.

Selective Annotation via Data Allocation: These Data Should Be Triaged to Experts for Annotation Rather Than the Model

To obtain high-quality annotations under limited budget, semi-automatic annotation methods are commonly used, where a portion of the data is annotated by experts and a model is then trained to complete the annotations for the remaining data. However, these methods mainly focus on selecting informative data for expert annotations to improve the model predictive ability (i.e., triage-to-human data), while the rest of the data is indiscriminately assigned to model annotation (i.e., triage-to-model data). This may lead to inefficiencies in budget allocation for annotations, as easy data that the model could accurately annotate may be unnecessarily assigned to the expert, and hard data may be misclassified by the model. As a result, the overall annotation quality may be compromised. To address this issue, we propose a selective annotation framework called SANT. It effectively takes advantage of both the triage-to-human and triage-to-model data through the proposed error-aware triage and bi-weighting mechanisms. As such, informative or hard data is assigned to the expert for annotation, while easy data is handled by the model. Experimental results show that SANT consistently outperforms other baselines, leading to higher-quality annotation through its proper allocation of data to both expert and model workers. We provide pioneering work on data annotation within budget constraints, establishing a landmark for future triage-based annotation studies.

STYLE: Improving Domain Transferability of Asking Clarification Questions in Large Language Model Powered Conversational Agents

Equipping a conversational search engine with strategies regarding when to ask clarification questions is becoming increasingly important across various domains. Attributing to the context understanding capability of LLMs and their access to domain-specific sources of knowledge, LLM-based clarification strategies feature rapid transfer to various domains in a post-hoc manner. However, they still struggle to deliver promising performance on unseen domains, struggling to achieve effective domain transferability. We take the first step to investigate this issue and existing methods tend to produce one-size-fits-all strategies across diverse domains, limiting their search effectiveness. In response, we introduce a novel method, called Style, to achieve effective domain transferability. Our experimental results indicate that Style bears strong domain transferability, resulting in an average search performance improvement of ~10% on four unseen domains.

CLAMBER: A Benchmark of Identifying and Clarifying Ambiguous Information Needs in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to meet user information needs, but their effectiveness in dealing with user queries that contain various types of ambiguity remains unknown, ultimately risking user trust and satisfaction. To this end, we introduce CLAMBER, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs using a well-organized taxonomy. Building upon the taxonomy, we construct ~12K high-quality data to assess the strengths, weaknesses, and potential risks of various off-the-shelf LLMs. Our findings indicate the limited practical utility of current LLMs in identifying and clarifying ambiguous user queries, even enhanced by chain-of-thought (CoT) and few-shot prompting. These techniques may result in overconfidence in LLMs and yield only marginal enhancements in identifying ambiguity. Furthermore, current LLMs fall short in generating high-quality clarifying questions due to a lack of conflict resolution and inaccurate utilization of inherent knowledge. In this paper, CLAMBER presents a guidance and promotes further research on proactive and trustworthy LLMs. Our dataset is available at https://github.com/zt991211/CLAMBER

Co-Matching: Towards Human-Machine Collaborative Legal Case Matching

Recent efforts have aimed to improve AI machines in legal case matching by integrating legal domain knowledge. However, successful legal case matching requires the tacit knowledge of legal practitioners, which is difficult to verbalize and encode into machines. This emphasizes the crucial role of involving legal practitioners in high-stakes legal case matching. To address this, we propose a collaborative matching framework called Co-Matching, which encourages both the machine and the legal practitioner to participate in the matching process, integrating tacit knowledge. Unlike existing methods that rely solely on the machine, Co-Matching allows both the legal practitioner and the machine to determine key sentences and then combine them probabilistically. Co-Matching introduces a method called ProtoEM to estimate human decision uncertainty, facilitating the probabilistic combination. Experimental results demonstrate that Co-Matching consistently outperforms existing legal case matching methods, delivering significant performance improvements over human- and machine-based matching in isolation (on average, +5.51% and +8.71%, respectively). Further analysis shows that Co-Matching also ensures better human-machine collaboration effectiveness. Our study represents a pioneering effort in human-machine collaboration for the matching task, marking a milestone for future collaborative matching studies.