Is Cognition and Action Consistent or Not: Investigating Large Language Model's Personality

In this study, we investigate the reliability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in professing human-like personality traits through responses to personality questionnaires. Our goal is to evaluate the consistency between LLMs' professed personality inclinations and their actual "behavior", examining the extent to which these models can emulate human-like personality patterns. Through a comprehensive analysis of LLM outputs against established human benchmarks, we seek to understand the cognition-action divergence in LLMs and propose hypotheses for the observed results based on psychological theories and metrics.

Can ChatGPT Rival Neural Machine Translation? A Comparative Study

Inspired by the increasing interest in leveraging large language models for translation, this paper evaluates the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) represented by ChatGPT in comparison to the mainstream neural machine translation (NMT) engines in translating Chinese diplomatic texts into English. Specifically, we examine the translation quality of ChatGPT and NMT engines as measured by four automated metrics and human evaluation based on an error-typology and six analytic rubrics. Our findings show that automated metrics yield similar results for ChatGPT under different prompts and NMT systems, while human annotators tend to assign noticeably higher scores to ChatGPT when it is provided an example or contextual information about the translation task. Pairwise correlation between automated metrics and dimensions of human evaluation produces weak and non-significant results, suggesting the divergence between the two methods of translation quality assessment. These findings provide valuable insights into the potential of ChatGPT as a capable machine translator, and the influence of prompt engineering on its performance.

Distinguishing Translations by Human, NMT, and ChatGPT: A Linguistic and Statistical Approach

The growing popularity of neural machine translation (NMT) and LLMs represented by ChatGPT underscores the need for a deeper understanding of their distinct characteristics and relationships. Such understanding is crucial for language professionals and researchers to make informed decisions and tactful use of these cutting-edge translation technology, but remains underexplored. This study aims to fill this gap by investigating three key questions: (1) the distinguishability of ChatGPT-generated translations from NMT and human translation (HT), (2) the linguistic characteristics of each translation type, and (3) the degree of resemblance between ChatGPT-produced translations and HT or NMT. To achieve these objectives, we employ statistical testing, machine learning algorithms, and multidimensional analysis (MDA) to analyze Spokesperson's Remarks and their translations. After extracting a wide range of linguistic features, supervised classifiers demonstrate high accuracy in distinguishing the three translation types, whereas unsupervised clustering techniques do not yield satisfactory results. Another major finding is that ChatGPT-produced translations exhibit greater similarity with NMT than HT in most MDA dimensions, which is further corroborated by distance computing and visualization. These novel insights shed light on the interrelationships among the three translation types and have implications for the future advancements of NMT and generative AI.

A Survey on Language Models for Code

In this work we systematically review the recent advancements in code processing with language models, covering 50+ models, 30+ evaluation tasks, 150+ datasets, and 550 related works. We break down code processing models into general language models represented by the GPT family and specialized models that are specifically pretrained on code, often with tailored objectives. We discuss the relations and differences between these models, and highlight the historical transition of code modeling from statistical models and RNNs to pretrained Transformers and LLMs, which is exactly the same course that had been taken by NLP. We also discuss code-specific features such as AST, CFG, and unit tests, along with their application in training code language models, and identify key challenges and potential future directions in this domain. We keep the survey open and updated on GitHub repository at https://github.com/codefuse-ai/Awesome-Code-LLM.

MELA: Multilingual Evaluation of Linguistic Acceptability

Recent benchmarks for Large Language Models (LLMs) have mostly focused on application-driven tasks such as complex reasoning and code generation, and this has led to a scarcity in purely linguistic evaluation of LLMs. Against this background, we introduce Multilingual Evaluation of Linguistic Acceptability -- MELA, the first multilingual benchmark on linguistic acceptability with 48K samples covering 10 languages from a diverse set of language families. We establish baselines of commonly used LLMs along with supervised models, and conduct cross-lingual transfer and multi-task learning experiments with XLM-R. In pursuit of multilingual interpretability, we analyze the weights of fine-tuned XLM-R to explore the possibility of identifying transfer difficulty between languages. Our results show that ChatGPT benefits much from in-context examples but still lags behind fine-tuned XLM-R, while the performance of GPT-4 is on par with fine-tuned XLM-R even in zero-shot setting. Cross-lingual and multi-task learning experiments show that unlike semantic tasks, in-language training data is crucial in acceptability judgements. Results in layerwise probing indicate that the upper layers of XLM-R become a task-specific but language-agnostic region for multilingual acceptability judgment. We also introduce the concept of conflicting weight, which could be a potential indicator for the difficulty of cross-lingual transfer between languages. Our data will be available at https://github.com/sjtu-compling/MELA.

Self-distillation Regularized Connectionist Temporal Classification Loss for Text Recognition: A Simple Yet Effective Approach

Text recognition methods are gaining rapid development. Some advanced techniques, e.g., powerful modules, language models, and un- and semi-supervised learning schemes, consecutively push the performance on public benchmarks forward. However, the problem of how to better optimize a text recognition model from the perspective of loss functions is largely overlooked. CTC-based methods, widely used in practice due to their good balance between performance and inference speed, still grapple with accuracy degradation. This is because CTC loss emphasizes the optimization of the entire sequence target while neglecting to learn individual characters. We propose a self-distillation scheme for CTC-based model to address this issue. It incorporates a framewise regularization term in CTC loss to emphasize individual supervision, and leverages the maximizing-a-posteriori of latent alignment to solve the inconsistency problem that arises in distillation between CTC-based models. We refer to the regularized CTC loss as Distillation Connectionist Temporal Classification (DCTC) loss. DCTC loss is module-free, requiring no extra parameters, longer inference lag, or additional training data or phases. Extensive experiments on public benchmarks demonstrate that DCTC can boost text recognition model accuracy by up to 2.6%, without any of these drawbacks.

Revisiting Acceptability Judgements

Years have passed since the NLP community has last focused on linguistic acceptability. In this work, we revisit this topic in the context of large language models. We introduce CoLAC - Corpus of Linguistic Acceptability in Chinese, the first large-scale non-English acceptability dataset that is verified by native speakers and comes with two sets of labels. Our experiments show that even the largest InstructGPT model performs only at chance level on CoLAC, while ChatGPT's performance (48.30 MCC) is also way below supervised models (59.03 MCC) and human (65.11 MCC). Through cross-lingual transfer experiments and fine-grained linguistic analysis, we demonstrate for the first time that knowledge of linguistic acceptability can be transferred across typologically distinct languages, as well as be traced back to pre-training.

Hedges in Bidirectional Translations of Publicity-Oriented Documents

Hedges are widely studied across registers and disciplines, yet research on the translation of hedges in political texts is extremely limited. This contrastive study is dedicated to investigating whether there is a diachronic change in the frequencies of hedging devices in the target texts, to what extent the changing frequencies of translated hedges through years are attributed to the source texts, and what translation strategies are adopted to deal with them. For the purposes of this research, two types of official political texts and their translations from China and the United Nations were collected to form three sub-corpora. Results show that hedges tend to appear more frequently in English political texts, be it original English or translated English. In addition, directionality seems to play an important role in influencing both the frequencies and translation strategies regarding the use of hedges. A noticeable diachronic increase of hedging devices is also observed in our corpus.

ArguGPT: evaluating, understanding and identifying argumentative essays generated by GPT models

AI generated content (AIGC) presents considerable challenge to educators around the world. Instructors need to be able to detect such text generated by large language models, either with the naked eye or with the help of some tools. There is also growing need to understand the lexical, syntactic and stylistic features of AIGC. To address these challenges in English language teaching, we first present ArguGPT, a balanced corpus of 4,038 argumentative essays generated by 7 GPT models in response to essay prompts from three sources: (1) in-class or homework exercises, (2) TOEFL and (3) GRE writing tasks. Machine-generated texts are paired with roughly equal number of human-written essays with three score levels matched in essay prompts. We then hire English instructors to distinguish machine essays from human ones. Results show that when first exposed to machine-generated essays, the instructors only have an accuracy of 61% in detecting them. But the number rises to 67% after one round of minimal self-training. Next, we perform linguistic analyses of these essays, which show that machines produce sentences with more complex syntactic structures while human essays tend to be lexically more complex. Finally, we test existing AIGC detectors and build our own detectors using SVMs and RoBERTa. Results suggest that a RoBERTa fine-tuned with the training set of ArguGPT achieves above 90% accuracy in both essay- and sentence-level classification. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive analysis of argumentative essays produced by generative large language models. Machine-authored essays in ArguGPT and our models will be made publicly available at https://github.com/huhailinguist/ArguGPT