MMLongBench-Doc: Benchmarking Long-context Document Understanding with Visualizations

Understanding documents with rich layouts and multi-modal components is a long-standing and practical task. Recent Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have made remarkable strides in various tasks, particularly in single-page document understanding (DU). However, their abilities on long-context DU remain an open problem. This work presents MMLongBench-Doc, a long-context, multi-modal benchmark comprising 1,062 expert-annotated questions. Distinct from previous datasets, it is constructed upon 130 lengthy PDF-formatted documents with an average of 49.4 pages and 20,971 textual tokens. Towards comprehensive evaluation, answers to these questions rely on pieces of evidence from (1) different sources (text, image, chart, table, and layout structure) and (2) various locations (i.e. page number). Moreover, 33.2% of the questions are cross-page questions requiring evidence across multiple pages. 22.8% of the questions are designed to be unanswerable for detecting potential hallucinations. Experiments on 14 LVLMs demonstrate that long-context DU greatly challenges current models. Notably, the best-performing model, GPT-4o, achieves an F1 score of only 42.7%, while the second-best, GPT-4V, scores 31.4%. Furthermore, 12 LVLMs (all except GPT-4o and GPT-4V) even present worse performance than their LLM counterparts which are fed with lossy-parsed OCR documents. These results validate the necessity of future research toward more capable long-context LVLMs. Project Page: https://mayubo2333.github.io/MMLongBench-Doc

LLMs-as-Instructors: Learning from Errors Toward Automating Model Improvement

This paper introduces the innovative "LLMs-as-Instructors" framework, which leverages the advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) to autonomously enhance the training of smaller target models. Inspired by the theory of "Learning from Errors", this framework employs an instructor LLM to meticulously analyze the specific errors within a target model, facilitating targeted and efficient training cycles. Within this framework, we implement two strategies: "Learning from Error," which focuses solely on incorrect responses to tailor training data, and "Learning from Error by Contrast", which uses contrastive learning to analyze both correct and incorrect responses for a deeper understanding of errors. Our empirical studies, conducted with several open-source models, demonstrate significant improvements across multiple benchmarks, including mathematical reasoning, coding abilities, and factual knowledge. Notably, the refined Llama-3-8b-Instruction has outperformed ChatGPT, illustrating the effectiveness of our approach. By leveraging the strengths of both strategies, we have attained a more balanced performance improvement on both in-domain and out-of-domain benchmarks. Our code can be found at https://yingjiahao14.github.io/LLMs-as-Instructors-pages/.

LLMs Assist NLP Researchers: Critique Paper (Meta-)Reviewing

This work is motivated by two key trends. On one hand, large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable versatility in various generative tasks such as writing, drawing, and question answering, significantly reducing the time required for many routine tasks. On the other hand, researchers, whose work is not only time-consuming but also highly expertise-demanding, face increasing challenges as they have to spend more time reading, writing, and reviewing papers. This raises the question: how can LLMs potentially assist researchers in alleviating their heavy workload? This study focuses on the topic of LLMs assist NLP Researchers, particularly examining the effectiveness of LLM in assisting paper (meta-)reviewing and its recognizability. To address this, we constructed the ReviewCritique dataset, which includes two types of information: (i) NLP papers (initial submissions rather than camera-ready) with both human-written and LLM-generated reviews, and (ii) each review comes with "deficiency" labels and corresponding explanations for individual segments, annotated by experts. Using ReviewCritique, this study explores two threads of research questions: (i) "LLMs as Reviewers", how do reviews generated by LLMs compare with those written by humans in terms of quality and distinguishability? (ii) "LLMs as Metareviewers", how effectively can LLMs identify potential issues, such as Deficient or unprofessional review segments, within individual paper reviews? To our knowledge, this is the first work to provide such a comprehensive analysis.

QRMeM: Unleash the Length Limitation through Question then Reflection Memory Mechanism

While large language models (LLMs) have made notable advancements in natural language processing, they continue to struggle with processing extensive text. Memory mechanism offers a flexible solution for managing long contexts, utilizing techniques such as compression, summarization, and structuring to facilitate nuanced and efficient handling of large volumes of text. However, existing techniques face challenges with static knowledge integration, leading to insufficient adaptation to task-specific needs and missing multi-segmentation relationships, which hinders the dynamic reorganization and logical combination of relevant segments during the response process. To address these issues, we introduce a novel strategy, Question then Reflection Memory Mechanism (QRMeM), incorporating a dual-structured memory pool. This pool synergizes static textual content with structured graph guidance, fostering a reflective trial-and-error approach for navigating and identifying relevant segments. Our evaluation across multiple-choice questions (MCQ) and multi-document question answering (Multi-doc QA) benchmarks showcases QRMeM enhanced performance compared to existing approaches.

Planning Like Human: A Dual-process Framework for Dialogue Planning

In proactive dialogue, the challenge lies not just in generating responses but in steering conversations toward predetermined goals, a task where Large Language Models (LLMs) typically struggle due to their reactive nature. Traditional approaches to enhance dialogue planning in LLMs, ranging from elaborate prompt engineering to the integration of policy networks, either face efficiency issues or deliver suboptimal performance. Inspired by the dualprocess theory in psychology, which identifies two distinct modes of thinking - intuitive (fast) and analytical (slow), we propose the Dual-Process Dialogue Planning (DPDP) framework. DPDP embodies this theory through two complementary planning systems: an instinctive policy model for familiar contexts and a deliberative Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) mechanism for complex, novel scenarios. This dual strategy is further coupled with a novel two-stage training regimen: offline Reinforcement Learning for robust initial policy model formation followed by MCTS-enhanced on-the-fly learning, which ensures a dynamic balance between efficiency and strategic depth. Our empirical evaluations across diverse dialogue tasks affirm DPDP's superiority in achieving both high-quality dialogues and operational efficiency, outpacing existing methods.

A + B: A General Generator-Reader Framework for Optimizing LLMs to Unleash Synergy Potential

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is an effective solution to supplement necessary knowledge to large language models (LLMs). Targeting its bottleneck of retriever performance, "generate-then-read" pipeline is proposed to replace the retrieval stage with generation from the LLM itself. Although promising, this research direction is underexplored and still cannot work in the scenario when source knowledge is given. In this paper, we formalize a general "A + B" framework with varying combinations of foundation models and types for systematic investigation. We explore the efficacy of the base and chat versions of LLMs and found their different functionalities suitable for generator A and reader B, respectively. Their combinations consistently outperform single models, especially in complex scenarios. Furthermore, we extend the application of the "A + B" framework to scenarios involving source documents through continuous learning, enabling the direct integration of external knowledge into LLMs. This approach not only facilitates effective acquisition of new knowledge but also addresses the challenges of safety and helpfulness post-adaptation. The paper underscores the versatility of the "A + B" framework, demonstrating its potential to enhance the practical application of LLMs across various domains.

Analyzing Temporal Complex Events with Large Language Models? A Benchmark towards Temporal, Long Context Understanding

The digital landscape is rapidly evolving with an ever-increasing volume of online news, emphasizing the need for swift and precise analysis of complex events. We refer to the complex events composed of many news articles over an extended period as Temporal Complex Event (TCE). This paper proposes a novel approach using Large Language Models (LLMs) to systematically extract and analyze the event chain within TCE, characterized by their key points and timestamps. We establish a benchmark, named TCELongBench, to evaluate the proficiency of LLMs in handling temporal dynamics and understanding extensive text. This benchmark encompasses three distinct tasks - reading comprehension, temporal sequencing, and future event forecasting. In the experiment, we leverage retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) method and LLMs with long context window to deal with lengthy news articles of TCE. Our findings indicate that models with suitable retrievers exhibit comparable performance with those utilizing long context window.

Combinatorial Approximations for Cluster Deletion: Simpler, Faster, and Better

Cluster deletion is an NP-hard graph clustering objective with applications in computational biology and social network analysis, where the goal is to delete a minimum number of edges to partition a graph into cliques. We first provide a tighter analysis of two previous approximation algorithms, improving their approximation guarantees from 4 to 3. Moreover, we show that both algorithms can be derandomized in a surprisingly simple way, by greedily taking a vertex of maximum degree in an auxiliary graph and forming a cluster around it. One of these algorithms relies on solving a linear program. Our final contribution is to design a new and purely combinatorial approach for doing so that is far more scalable in theory and practice.

Quantifying and Mitigating Unimodal Biases in Multimodal Large Language Models: A Causal Perspective

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have facilitated the development of Multimodal LLMs (MLLMs). Despite their impressive capabilities, MLLMs often suffer from an over-reliance on unimodal biases (e.g., language bias and vision bias), leading to incorrect answers in complex multimodal tasks. To investigate this issue, we propose a causal framework to interpret the biases in Visual Question Answering (VQA) problems. Within our framework, we devise a causal graph to elucidate the predictions of MLLMs on VQA problems, and assess the causal effect of biases through an in-depth causal analysis. Motivated by the causal graph, we introduce a novel MORE dataset, consisting of 12,000 VQA instances. This dataset is designed to challenge MLLMs' abilities, necessitating multi-hop reasoning and the surmounting of unimodal biases. Furthermore, we propose two strategies to mitigate unimodal biases and enhance MLLMs' reasoning capabilities, including a Decompose-Verify-Answer (DeVA) framework for limited-access MLLMs and the refinement of open-source MLLMs through fine-tuning. Extensive quantitative and qualitative experiments offer valuable insights for future research. Our project page is at https://opencausalab.github.io/MORE.

Meaningful Learning: Advancing Abstract Reasoning in Large Language Models via Generic Fact Guidance

Large language models (LLMs) have developed impressive performance and strong explainability across various reasoning scenarios, marking a significant stride towards mimicking human-like intelligence. Despite this, when tasked with simple questions supported by a generic fact, LLMs often fail to provide consistent and precise answers, indicating a deficiency in abstract reasoning abilities. This has sparked a vigorous debate about whether LLMs are genuinely reasoning or merely memorizing. In light of this, we design a preliminary study to quantify and delve into the abstract reasoning abilities of existing LLMs. Our findings reveal a substantial discrepancy between their general reasoning and abstract reasoning performances. To relieve this problem, we tailor an abstract reasoning dataset (AbsR) together with a meaningful learning paradigm to teach LLMs how to leverage generic facts for reasoning purposes. The results show that our approach not only boosts the general reasoning performance of LLMs but also makes considerable strides towards their capacity for abstract reasoning, moving beyond simple memorization or imitation to a more nuanced understanding and application of generic facts.