An Empirical Study on Large Language Models in Accuracy and Robustness under Chinese Industrial Scenarios

Recent years have witnessed the rapid development of large language models (LLMs) in various domains. To better serve the large number of Chinese users, many commercial vendors in China have adopted localization strategies, training and providing local LLMs specifically customized for Chinese users. Furthermore, looking ahead, one of the key future applications of LLMs will be practical deployment in industrial production by enterprises and users in those sectors. However, the accuracy and robustness of LLMs in industrial scenarios have not been well studied. In this paper, we present a comprehensive empirical study on the accuracy and robustness of LLMs in the context of the Chinese industrial production area. We manually collected 1,200 domain-specific problems from 8 different industrial sectors to evaluate LLM accuracy. Furthermore, we designed a metamorphic testing framework containing four industrial-specific stability categories with eight abilities, totaling 13,631 questions with variants to evaluate LLM robustness. In total, we evaluated 9 different LLMs developed by Chinese vendors, as well as four different LLMs developed by global vendors. Our major findings include: (1) Current LLMs exhibit low accuracy in Chinese industrial contexts, with all LLMs scoring less than 0.6. (2) The robustness scores vary across industrial sectors, and local LLMs overall perform worse than global ones. (3) LLM robustness differs significantly across abilities. Global LLMs are more robust under logical-related variants, while advanced local LLMs perform better on problems related to understanding Chinese industrial terminology. Our study results provide valuable guidance for understanding and promoting the industrial domain capabilities of LLMs from both development and industrial enterprise perspectives. The results further motivate possible research directions and tooling support.

VRPTEST: Evaluating Visual Referring Prompting in Large Multimodal Models

With recent advancements in Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) across various domains, a novel prompting method called visual referring prompting has emerged, showing significant potential in enhancing human-computer interaction within multimodal systems. This method offers a more natural and flexible approach to human interaction with these systems compared to traditional text descriptions or coordinates. However, the categorization of visual referring prompting remains undefined, and its impact on the performance of LMMs has yet to be formally examined. In this study, we conduct the first comprehensive analysis of LMMs using a variety of visual referring prompting strategies. We introduce a benchmark dataset called VRPTEST, comprising 3 different visual tasks and 2,275 images, spanning diverse combinations of prompt strategies. Using VRPTEST, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of eight versions of prominent open-source and proprietary foundation models, including two early versions of GPT-4V. We develop an automated assessment framework based on software metamorphic testing techniques to evaluate the accuracy of LMMs without the need for human intervention or manual labeling. We find that the current proprietary models generally outperform the open-source ones, showing an average accuracy improvement of 22.70%; however, there is still potential for improvement. Moreover, our quantitative analysis shows that the choice of prompt strategy significantly affects the accuracy of LMMs, with variations ranging from -17.5% to +7.3%. Further case studies indicate that an appropriate visual referring prompting strategy can improve LMMs' understanding of context and location information, while an unsuitable one might lead to answer rejection. We also provide insights on minimizing the negative impact of visual referring prompting on LMMs.

InstructTA: Instruction-Tuned Targeted Attack for Large Vision-Language Models

Large vision-language models (LVLMs) have demonstrated their incredible capability in image understanding and response generation. However, this rich visual interaction also makes LVLMs vulnerable to adversarial examples. In this paper, we formulate a novel and practical gray-box attack scenario that the adversary can only access the visual encoder of the victim LVLM, without the knowledge of its prompts (which are often proprietary for service providers and not publicly available) and its underlying large language model (LLM). This practical setting poses challenges to the cross-prompt and cross-model transferability of targeted adversarial attack, which aims to confuse the LVLM to output a response that is semantically similar to the attacker's chosen target text. To this end, we propose an instruction-tuned targeted attack (dubbed InstructTA) to deliver the targeted adversarial attack on LVLMs with high transferability. Initially, we utilize a public text-to-image generative model to "reverse" the target response into a target image, and employ GPT-4 to infer a reasonable instruction $\boldsymbol{p}^\prime$ from the target response. We then form a local surrogate model (sharing the same visual encoder with the victim LVLM) to extract instruction-aware features of an adversarial image example and the target image, and minimize the distance between these two features to optimize the adversarial example. To further improve the transferability, we augment the instruction $\boldsymbol{p}^\prime$ with instructions paraphrased from an LLM. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superiority of our proposed method in targeted attack performance and transferability.

Benchmarking and Explaining Large Language Model-based Code Generation: A Causality-Centric Approach

While code generation has been widely used in various software development scenarios, the quality of the generated code is not guaranteed. This has been a particular concern in the era of large language models (LLMs)- based code generation, where LLMs, deemed a complex and powerful black-box model, is instructed by a high-level natural language specification, namely a prompt, to generate code. Nevertheless, effectively evaluating and explaining the code generation capability of LLMs is inherently challenging, given the complexity of LLMs and the lack of transparency. Inspired by the recent progress in causality analysis and its application in software engineering, this paper launches a causality analysis-based approach to systematically analyze the causal relations between the LLM input prompts and the generated code. To handle various technical challenges in this study, we first propose a novel causal graph-based representation of the prompt and the generated code, which is established over the fine-grained, human-understandable concepts in the input prompts. The formed causal graph is then used to identify the causal relations between the prompt and the derived code. We illustrate the insights that our framework can provide by studying over 3 popular LLMs with over 12 prompt adjustment strategies. The results of these studies illustrate the potential of our technique to provide insights into LLM effectiveness, and aid end-users in understanding predictions. Additionally, we demonstrate that our approach provides actionable insights to improve the quality of the LLM-generated code by properly calibrating the prompt.

Split and Merge: Aligning Position Biases in Large Language Model based Evaluators

Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise as automated evaluators for assessing the quality of answers generated by AI systems. However, these LLM-based evaluators exhibit position bias, or inconsistency, when used to evaluate candidate answers in pairwise comparisons, favoring either the first or second answer regardless of content. To address this limitation, we propose PORTIA, an alignment-based system designed to mimic human comparison strategies to calibrate position bias in a lightweight yet effective manner. Specifically, PORTIA splits the answers into multiple segments, aligns similar content across candidate answers, and then merges them back into a single prompt for evaluation by LLMs. We conducted extensive experiments with six diverse LLMs to evaluate 11,520 answer pairs. Our results show that PORTIA markedly enhances the consistency rates for all the models and comparison forms tested, achieving an average relative improvement of 47.46%. Remarkably, PORTIA enables less advanced GPT models to achieve 88% agreement with the state-of-the-art GPT-4 model at just 10% of the cost. Furthermore, it rectifies around 80% of the position bias instances within the GPT-4 model, elevating its consistency rate up to 98%. Subsequent human evaluations indicate that the PORTIA-enhanced GPT-3.5 model can even surpass the standalone GPT-4 in terms of alignment with human evaluators. These findings highlight PORTIA's ability to correct position bias, improve LLM consistency, and boost performance while keeping cost-efficiency. This represents a valuable step toward a more reliable and scalable use of LLMs for automated evaluations across diverse applications.

"Oops, Did I Just Say That?" Testing and Repairing Unethical Suggestions of Large Language Models with Suggest-Critique-Reflect Process

As the popularity of large language models (LLMs) soars across various applications, ensuring their alignment with human values has become a paramount concern. In particular, given that LLMs have great potential to serve as general-purpose AI assistants in daily life, their subtly unethical suggestions become a serious and real concern. Tackling the challenge of automatically testing and repairing unethical suggestions is thus demanding. This paper introduces the first framework for testing and repairing unethical suggestions made by LLMs. We first propose ETHICSSUITE, a test suite that presents complex, contextualized, and realistic moral scenarios to test LLMs. We then propose a novel suggest-critic-reflect (SCR) process, serving as an automated test oracle to detect unethical suggestions. We recast deciding if LLMs yield unethical suggestions (a hard problem; often requiring human expertise and costly to decide) into a PCR task that can be automatically checked for violation. Moreover, we propose a novel on-the-fly (OTF) repairing scheme that repairs unethical suggestions made by LLMs in real-time. The OTF scheme is applicable to LLMs in a black-box API setting with moderate cost. With ETHICSSUITE, our study on seven popular LLMs (e.g., ChatGPT, GPT-4) uncovers in total 109,824 unethical suggestions. We apply our OTF scheme on two LLMs (Llama-13B and ChatGPT), which generates valid repair to a considerable amount of unethical ones, paving the way for more ethically conscious LLMs.