SwiftSage: A Generative Agent with Fast and Slow Thinking for Complex Interactive Tasks

We introduce SwiftSage, a novel agent framework inspired by the dual-process theory of human cognition, designed to excel in action planning for complex interactive reasoning tasks. SwiftSage integrates the strengths of behavior cloning and prompting large language models (LLMs) to enhance task completion performance. The framework comprises two primary modules: the Swift module, representing fast and intuitive thinking, and the Sage module, emulating deliberate thought processes. The Swift module is a small encoder-decoder LM fine-tuned on the oracle agent's action trajectories, while the Sage module employs LLMs such as GPT-4 for subgoal planning and grounding. We develop a heuristic method to harmoniously integrate the two modules, resulting in a more efficient and robust problem-solving process. In 30 tasks from the ScienceWorld benchmark, SwiftSage significantly outperforms other methods such as SayCan, ReAct, and Reflexion, demonstrating its effectiveness in solving complex real-world tasks.

Inference-Time Policy Adapters (IPA): Tailoring Extreme-Scale LMs without Fine-tuning

Large language models excel at a variety of language tasks when prompted with examples or instructions. Yet controlling these models through prompting alone is limited. Tailoring language models through fine-tuning (e.g., via reinforcement learning) can be effective, but it is expensive and requires model access. We propose Inference-time Policy Adapters (IPA), which efficiently tailors a language model such as GPT-3 without fine-tuning it. IPA guides a large base model during decoding time through a lightweight policy adaptor trained to optimize an arbitrary user objective with reinforcement learning. On five challenging text generation tasks, such as toxicity reduction and open-domain generation, IPA consistently brings significant improvements over off-the-shelf language models. It outperforms competitive baseline methods, sometimes even including expensive fine-tuning. In particular, tailoring GPT-2 with IPA can outperform GPT-3, while tailoring GPT- 3 with IPA brings a major performance boost over GPT-3 (and sometimes even over GPT-4). Our promising results highlight the potential of IPA as a lightweight alternative to tailoring extreme-scale language models.

How Predictable Are Large Language Model Capabilities? A Case Study on BIG-bench

We investigate the predictability of large language model (LLM) capabilities: given records of past experiments using different model families, numbers of parameters, tasks, and numbers of in-context examples, can we accurately predict LLM performance on new experiment configurations? Answering this question has practical implications for LLM users (e.g., deciding which models to try), developers (e.g., prioritizing evaluation on representative tasks), and the research community (e.g., identifying hard-to-predict capabilities that warrant further investigation). We study the performance prediction problem on experiment records from BIG-bench. On a random train-test split, an MLP-based predictor achieves RMSE below 5%, demonstrating the presence of learnable patterns within the experiment records. Further, we formulate the problem of searching for "small-bench," an informative subset of BIG-bench tasks from which the performance of the full set can be maximally recovered, and find a subset as informative for evaluating new model families as BIG-bench Hard, while being 3x smaller.

Estimating Large Language Model Capabilities without Labeled Test Data

Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited an impressive ability to perform in-context learning (ICL) from only a few examples, but the success of ICL varies widely from task to task. Thus, it is important to quickly determine whether ICL is applicable to a new task, but directly evaluating ICL accuracy can be expensive in situations where test data is expensive to annotate -- the exact situations where ICL is most appealing. In this paper, we propose the task of ICL accuracy estimation, in which we predict the accuracy of an LLM when doing in-context learning on a new task given only unlabeled data for that task. To perform ICL accuracy estimation, we propose a method that trains a meta-model using LLM confidence scores as features. We compare our method to several strong accuracy estimation baselines on a new benchmark that covers 4 LLMs and 3 task collections. On average, the meta-model improves over all baselines and achieves the same estimation performance as directly evaluating on 40 labeled test examples per task, across the total 12 settings. We encourage future work to improve on our methods and evaluate on our ICL accuracy estimation benchmark to deepen our understanding of when ICL works.

GRILL: Grounded Vision-language Pre-training via Aligning Text and Image Regions

Generalization to unseen tasks is an important ability for few-shot learners to achieve better zero-/few-shot performance on diverse tasks. However, such generalization to vision-language tasks including grounding and generation tasks has been under-explored; existing few-shot VL models struggle to handle tasks that involve object grounding and multiple images such as visual commonsense reasoning or NLVR2. In this paper, we introduce GRILL, GRounded vIsion Language aLigning, a novel VL model that can be generalized to diverse tasks including visual question answering, captioning, and grounding tasks with no or very few training instances. Specifically, GRILL learns object grounding and localization by exploiting object-text alignments, which enables it to transfer to grounding tasks in a zero-/few-shot fashion. We evaluate our model on various zero-/few-shot VL tasks and show that it consistently surpasses the state-of-the-art few-shot methods.

Are Machine Rationales (Not) Useful to Humans? Measuring and Improving Human Utility of Free-Text Rationales

Among the remarkable emergent capabilities of large language models (LMs) is free-text rationalization; beyond a certain scale, large LMs are capable of generating seemingly useful rationalizations, which in turn, can dramatically enhance their performances on leaderboards. This phenomenon raises a question: can machine generated rationales also be useful for humans, especially when lay humans try to answer questions based on those machine rationales? We observe that human utility of existing rationales is far from satisfactory, and expensive to estimate with human studies. Existing metrics like task performance of the LM generating the rationales, or similarity between generated and gold rationales are not good indicators of their human utility. While we observe that certain properties of rationales like conciseness and novelty are correlated with their human utility, estimating them without human involvement is challenging. We show that, by estimating a rationale's helpfulness in answering similar unseen instances, we can measure its human utility to a better extent. We also translate this finding into an automated score, GEN-U, that we propose, which can help improve LMs' ability to generate rationales with better human utility, while maintaining most of its task performance. Lastly, we release all code and collected data with this project.

SCOTT: Self-Consistent Chain-of-Thought Distillation

Large language models (LMs) beyond a certain scale, demonstrate the emergent capability of generating free-text rationales for their predictions via chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting. While CoT can yield dramatically improved performance, such gains are only observed for sufficiently large LMs. Even more concerning, there is little guarantee that the generated rationales are consistent with LM's predictions or faithfully justify the decisions. In this work, we propose a faithful knowledge distillation method to learn a small, self-consistent CoT model from a teacher model that is orders of magnitude larger. To form better supervision, we elicit rationales supporting the gold answers from a large LM (teacher) by contrastive decoding, which encourages the teacher to generate tokens that become more plausible only when the answer is considered. To ensure faithful distillation, we use the teacher-generated rationales to learn a student LM with a counterfactual reasoning objective, which prevents the student from ignoring the rationales to make inconsistent predictions. Experiments show that, while yielding comparable end-task performance, our method can generate CoT rationales that are more faithful than baselines do. Further analysis suggests that such a model respects the rationales more when making decisions; thus, we can improve its performance more by refining its rationales.

Exploring Distributional Shifts in Large Language Models for Code Analysis

We systematically study the capacity of two large language models for code - CodeT5 and Codex - to generalize to out-of-domain data. In this study, we consider two fundamental applications - code summarization, and code generation. We split data into domains following its natural boundaries - by an organization, by a project, and by a module within the software project. This makes recognition of in-domain vs out-of-domain data at the time of deployment trivial. We establish that samples from each new domain present both models with a significant challenge of distribution shift. We study how well different established methods can adapt models to better generalize to new domains. Our experiments show that while multitask learning alone is a reasonable baseline, combining it with few-shot finetuning on examples retrieved from training data can achieve very strong performance. In fact, according to our experiments, this solution can outperform direct finetuning for very low-data scenarios. Finally, we consider variations of this approach to create a more broadly applicable method to adapt to multiple domains at once. We find that in the case of code generation, a model adapted to multiple domains simultaneously performs on par with those adapted to each domain individually.

PairReranker: Pairwise Reranking for Natural Language Generation

Pre-trained language models have been successful in natural language generation (NLG) tasks. While various decoding methods have been employed, they often produce suboptimal results. We first present an empirical analysis of three NLG tasks: summarization, machine translation, and constrained text generation. We found that selecting the best output from the results of multiple decoding methods can significantly improve performance. To further improve reranking for NLG tasks, we proposed a novel method, \textsc{PairReranker}, which uses a single encoder and a pairwise loss function to jointly encode a source input and a pair of candidates and compare them. Experiments on three NLG tasks demonstrated the effectiveness and flexibility of \textsc{PairReranker}, showing strong results, compared with previous baselines. In addition, our \textsc{PairReranker} can generalize to significantly improve GPT-3 (text-davinci-003) results (e.g., 24.55\% on CommonGen and 11.35\% on WMT18 zh-en), even though our rerankers are not trained with any GPT-3 candidates.

An AI Dungeon Master's Guide: Learning to Converse and Guide with Intents and Theory-of-Mind in Dungeons and Dragons

We propose a novel task, G4C (Goal-driven Guidance Generation in Grounded Communication), for studying goal-driven and grounded natural language interactions. Specifically, we choose Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) -- a role-playing game consisting of multiple player characters and a Dungeon Master (DM) who collaborate to achieve a set of goals that are beneficial to the players -- as a testbed for this task. Here, each of the player characters is a student, with their own personas and abilities, and the DM is the teacher, an arbitrator of the rules of the world and responsible for assisting and guiding the students towards a global goal. We propose a theory-of-mind-inspired methodology for training such a DM with reinforcement learning (RL), where a DM: (1) learns to predict how the players will react to its utterances using a dataset of D&D dialogue transcripts; and (2) uses this prediction as a reward function providing feedback on how effective these utterances are at guiding the players towards a goal. Human and automated evaluations show that a DM trained with RL to generate guidance by incorporating a theory-of-mind of the players significantly improves the players' ability to achieve goals grounded in their shared world.