The Chinese Spelling Correction (CSC) task aims to detect and correct misspelled characters in Chinese text, and has received lots of attention in the past few years. Most recent studies adopt a Transformer-based model and leverage different features of characters such as pronunciation, glyph and contextual information to enhance the model’s ability to complete the task. Despite their state-of-the-art performance, we observe two issues that should be addressed to further advance the CSC task. First, the widely-used benchmark datasets SIGHAN13, SIGHAN14 and SIGHAN15, contain many mistakes. Hence the performance of existing models is not accurate and should be re-evaluated. Second, existing models seem to have reached a performance bottleneck, where the improvements on the SIGHAN’s testing sets are increasingly smaller and unstable. To deal with the two issues, we make two contributions: (1) we manually fix the SIGHAN datasets and re-evaluate four representative CSC models using the fixed datasets; (2) we analyze the new results to identify the spelling errors that none of the four models successfully corrects, based on which we propose a simple yet effective refinement solution. Experimental results show that our solution improves the four models in all metrics by notable margins.
论文检索
输入标题、作者或关键词，从 12,319 篇学术成果中精准定位
Bi-Directional Multi-Granularity Generation Framework for Knowledge Graph-to-Text with Large Language Model
PDF ↗The knowledge graph-to-text (KG-to-text) generation task aims to synthesize coherent and engaging sentences that accurately convey the complex information derived from an input knowledge graph. Existing methods generate the whole target text based on all KG triples at once and may incorporate incorrect KG triples for each sentence. To this end, we propose the bi-directional multi-granularity generation framework. Instead of generating the whole text at a time, we construct the sentence level generation based on the corresponding triples and generate the graph-level text as a result. Moreover, we design a backward relation extraction task to enhance the correctness of relational information. Our method achieves the new state-of-the-art in benchmark dataset WebNLG and further analysis shows the efficiency of different modules.
One type of question that is commonly found in day-to-day scenarios is “fan-out” questions, complex multi-hop, multi-document reasoning questions that require finding information about a large number of entities. However, there exist few resources to evaluate this type of question-answering capability among large language models. To evaluate complex reasoning in LLMs more fully, we present FanOutQA, a high-quality dataset of fan-out question-answer pairs and human-annotated decompositions with English Wikipedia as the knowledge base. We formulate three benchmark settings across our dataset and benchmark 7 LLMs, including GPT-4, LLaMA 2, Claude-2.1, and Mixtral-8x7B, finding that contemporary models still have room to improve reasoning over inter-document dependencies in a long context. We provide our dataset, along with open-source tools to run models to encourage evaluation.
Virtual environments play a key role in benchmarking advances in complex planning and decision-making tasks but are expensive and complicated to build by hand. Can current language models themselves serve as world simulators, correctly predicting how actions change different world states, thus bypassing the need for extensive manual coding? Our goal is to answer this question in the context of text-based simulators. Our approach is to build and use a new benchmark, called ByteSized32-State-Prediction, containing a dataset of text game state transitions and accompanying game tasks. We use this to directly quantify, for the first time, how well LLMs can serve as text-based world simulators. We test GPT-4 on this dataset and find that, despite its impressive performance, it is still an unreliable world simulator without further innovations. This work thus contributes both new insights into current LLM’s capabilities and weaknesses, as well as a novel benchmark to track future progress as new models appear.
Detecting semantic arguments of a predicate word has been conventionally modeled as a sentence-level task. The typical reader, however, perfectly interprets predicate-argument relations in a much wider context than just the sentence where the predicate was evoked. In this work, we reformulate the problem of argument detection through textual entailment to capture semantic relations across sentence boundaries. We propose a method that tests whether some semantic relation can be inferred from a full passage by first encoding it into a simple and standalone proposition and then testing for entailment against the passage. Our method does not require direct supervision, which is generally absent due to dataset scarcity, but instead builds on existing NLI and sentence-level SRL resources. Such a method can potentially explicate pragmatically understood relations into a set of explicit sentences. We demonstrate it on a recent document-level benchmark, outperforming some supervised methods and contemporary language models.
Benchmarking is seen as critical to assessing progress in NLP. However, creating a benchmark involves many design decisions (e.g., which datasets to include, which metrics to use) that often rely on tacit, untested assumptions about what the benchmark is intended to measure or is actually measuring. There is currently no principled way of analyzing these decisions and how they impact the validity of the benchmark’s measurements. To address this gap, we draw on evidence-centered design in educational assessments and propose Evidence-Centered Benchmark Design (ECBD), a framework which formalizes the benchmark design process into five modules. ECBD specifies the role each module plays in helping practitioners collect evidence about capabilities of interest. Specifically, each module requires benchmark designers to describe, justify, and support benchmark design choices—e.g., clearly specifying the capabilities the benchmark aims to measure or how evidence about those capabilities is collected from model responses. To demonstrate the use of ECBD, we conduct case studies with three benchmarks: BoolQ, SuperGLUE, and HELM. Our analysis reveals common trends in benchmark design and documentation that could threaten the validity of benchmarks’ measurements.
Large language models (LLMs) are typically limited to processing texts within context window size, which has spurred significant research efforts into enhancing LLMs’ long-context understanding as well as developing high-quality benchmarks to evaluate the ability. However, prior datasets suffer from short comings like short length compared to the context window of modern LLMs; outdated documents that might have data leakage problems; and an emphasis on short dependency tasks only. In this paper, we present LooGLE , a Long Context Generic Language Evaluation benchmark. It features documents post-2022, with over 24,000 tokens per document and 6,000 newly generated questions spanning varying dependency ranges in diverse domains. Human annotators meticulously crafted over 1,100 high-quality question-answer (QA) pairs with thorough cross-validation for a most precise assessment of LLMs’ long dependency capabilities. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of representative LLMs on LooGLE . The results indicate that most LLMs have shockingly bad long context ability and fail to capture long dependencies in the context, even when their context window size is enough to fit the entire document. Our results shed light on enhancing the “true long-context understanding” ability of LLMs instead of merely enlarging their context window.
Theory of Mind (ToM), the ability to understand people’s mental states, is an essential ingredient for developing machines with human-level social intelligence. Recent machine learning models, particularly large language models, seem to show some aspects of ToM understanding. However, existing ToM benchmarks use unimodal datasets – either video or text. Human ToM, on the other hand, is more than video or text understanding. People can flexibly reason about another person’s mind based on conceptual representations (e.g., goals, beliefs, plans) extracted from any available data. To address this, we introduce a multimodal Theory of Mind question answering (MMToM-QA) benchmark. MMToM-QA comprehensively evaluates machine ToM both on multimodal data and on different kinds of unimodal data about a person’s activity in a household environment. To engineer multimodal ToM capacity, we propose a novel method, BIP-ALM (Bayesian Inverse Planning Accelerated by Language Models). BIP-ALM extracts unified representations from multimodal data and utilizes language models for scalable Bayesian inverse planning. We conducted a systematic comparison of human performance, BIP-ALM, and state-of-the-art models, including GPT-4. The experiments demonstrate that large language models and large multimodal models still lack robust ToM capacity. BIP-ALM, on the other hand, shows promising results, by leveraging the power of both model-based mental inference and language models.
Zero-shot stance detection (ZSSD) aims to determine whether the author of a text is in favor, against, or neutral toward a target that is unseen during training. In this paper, we present EZ-STANCE, a large English ZSSD dataset with 47,316 annotated text-target pairs. In contrast to VAST, which is the only other large existing ZSSD dataset for English, EZ-STANCE is 2.5 times larger, includes both noun-phrase targets and claim targets that cover a wide range of domains, provides two challenging subtasks for ZSSD: target-based ZSSD and domain-based ZSSD, and contains much harder examples for the neutral class. We evaluate EZ-STANCE using state-of-the-art deep learning models. Furthermore, we propose to transform ZSSD into the NLI task by applying simple yet effective prompts to noun-phrase targets. Our experimental results show that EZ-STANCE is a challenging new benchmark, which provides significant research opportunities on English ZSSD. We publicly release our dataset and code at https://github.com/chenyez/EZ-STANCE.
With the growing complexity of fact verification tasks, the concern with “thoughtful” reasoning capabilities is increasing. However, recent fact verification benchmarks mainly focus on checking a narrow scope of semantic factoids within claims and lack an explicit logical reasoning process. In this paper, we introduce CHECKWHY, a challenging dataset tailored to a novel causal fact verification task: checking the truthfulness of the causal relation within claims through rigorous reasoning steps. CHECKWHY consists of over 19K “why” claim-evidence- argument structure triplets with supports, refutes, and not enough info labels. Each argument structure is composed of connected evidence, representing the reasoning process that begins with foundational evidence and progresses toward claim establishment. Through extensive experiments on state-of-the-art models, we validate the importance of incorporating the argument structure for causal fact verification. Moreover, the automated and human evaluation of argument structure generation reveals the difficulty in producing satisfying argument structure by fine-tuned models or Chain-of-Thought prompted LLMs, leaving considerable room for future improvements.
M4LE: A Multi-Ability Multi-Range Multi-Task Multi-Domain Long-Context Evaluation Benchmark for Large Language Models
PDF ↗Managing long sequences has become an important and necessary feature for large language models (LLMs). However, assessing their ability to handle long contexts remains a challenge. This paper introduces M^4LE, a \textbf{M}ulti-ability, \textbf{M}ulti-range, \textbf{M}ulti-task, \textbf{M}ulti-domain benchmark for \textbf{L}ong-context \textbf{E}valuation. It encompasses 36 NLP datasets, covering 11 types of tasks and 12 domains, providing a comprehensive test bed. To address the lack of tasks featuring naturally long sequences, we propose an automatic approach to convert short-sequence tasks into long-sequence scenarios. These scenarios evaluate LLMs’ long-context understanding across five key abilities: understanding of single or multiple relevant spans in long contexts based on explicit or semantic hints, and global context understanding. This automatic approach allows us to create instances evenly distributed from 1k to 8k input length. Our evaluation of 11 prominent LLMs reveals that 1) Current LLMs struggle to understand long context, particularly when tasks require multiple-span attention. 2) Semantic retrieval is more difficult for competent LLMs. 3) Models fine-tuned on longer text with position interpolation have comparable performance to those using Neural Tangent Kernel (NTK) aware scaling methods without fine-tuning. We make our benchmark publicly available to encourage future research in this challenging area.
We introduce Latxa, a family of large language models for Basque ranging from 7 to 70 billion parameters. Latxa is based on Llama 2, which we continue pretraining on a new Basque corpus comprising 4.3M documents and 4.2B tokens. Addressing the scarcity of high-quality benchmarks for Basque, we further introduce 4 multiple choice evaluation datasets: EusProficiency, comprising 5,169 questions from official language proficiency exams; EusReading, comprising 352 reading comprehension questions; EusTrivia, comprising 1,715 trivia questions from 5 knowledge areas; and EusExams, comprising 16,046 questions from public examinations. In our extensive evaluation, Latxa outperforms all previous open models we compare to by a large margin. In addition, it is competitive with GPT-4 Turbo in language proficiency and understanding, despite lagging behind in reading comprehension and knowledge-intensive tasks. Both the Latxa family of models, as well as our new pretraining corpora and evaluation datasets, are publicly available under open licenses. Our suite enables reproducible research on methods to build LLMs for low-resource languages.
As Natural Language Processing (NLP) systems are increasingly employed in intricate social environments, a pressing query emerges: *Can these NLP systems mirror human-esque collaborative intelligence, in a multi-agent society consisting of multiple large language models (LLMs)?* This paper probes the collaboration mechanisms among contemporary NLP systems by melding practical experiments with theoretical insights. We fabricate four unique ‘societies’ comprised of LLM agents, where each agent is characterized by a specific ‘trait’ (easy-going or overconfident) and engages in collaboration with a distinct ‘thinking pattern’ (debate or reflection). Through evaluating these multi-agent societies on three benchmark datasets, we discern that certain collaborative strategies not only outshine previous top-tier approaches but also optimize efficiency (using fewer API tokens). Moreover, our results further illustrate that LLM agents manifest human-like social behaviors, such as conformity and consensus reaching, mirroring foundational social psychology theories. In conclusion, we integrate insights from social psychology to contextualize the collaboration of LLM agents, inspiring further investigations into the collaboration mechanism for LLMs. We commit to sharing our code and datasets, hoping to catalyze further research in this promising avenue.
Language technologies should be judged on their usefulness in real-world use cases. An often overlooked aspect in natural language processing (NLP) research and evaluation is language variation in the form of non-standard dialects or language varieties (hereafter, varieties). Most NLP benchmarks are limited to standard language varieties. To fill this gap, we propose DIALECTBENCH, the first-ever large-scale benchmark for NLP on varieties, which aggregates an extensive set of task-varied varieties datasets (10 text-level tasks covering 281 varieties). This allows for a comprehensive evaluation of NLP system performance on different varieties. We provide substantial proof of performance disparities between standard and non-standard language varieties, and we also identify language clusters with larger performance divergence across tasks.We believe DIALECTBENCH provides a comprehensive view of the current state of NLP for varieties and one step towards advancing it further.
Recently, there has been growing interest in long-context scaling of large language models (LLMs). To facilitate research in this field, we propose L-Eval to institute a more standardized evaluation for Long-Context Language Models (LCLMs) addressing two key aspects: dataset construction and evaluation metrics. On the one hand, we build a new evaluation suite containing 20 sub-tasks, 508 long documents, and more than 2,000 human-labeled query-response pairs including diverse task types, domains, and input length (3k~200k tokens). On the other hand, we investigate the effectiveness of evaluation metrics for LCLMs and we show that Length-instruction-enhanced (LIE) evaluation and LLM judges can better correlate with human judgments. We conducted a comprehensive study of 4 popular commercial LLMs and 12 open-source counterparts using the L-Eval benchmark. Our empirical findings offer useful insights into the study of LCLMs and lay the groundwork for the development of a more principled evaluation of these models.
Multimodal ArXiv: A Dataset for Improving Scientific Comprehension of Large Vision-Language Models
PDF ↗Large vision-language models (LVLMs) excel across diverse tasks involving concrete images from natural scenes. However, their ability to interpret abstract figures, such as geometry shapes and scientific plots, remains limited due to a scarcity of training datasets in scientific domains.To fill this gap, we introduce Multimodal ArXiv, consisting of ArXivCap and ArXivQA, for enhancing LVLMs scientific comprehension.ArXivCap is a figure-caption dataset comprising 6.4M images and 3.9M captions, sourced from 572K ArXiv papers spanning various scientific domains.Drawing from ArXivCap, we introduce ArXivQA, a question-answering dataset generated by prompting GPT-4V based on scientific figures. ArXivQA greatly enhances open-sourced LVLMs’ mathematical reasoning capabilities, achieving a 10.4% absolute accuracy gain on a multimodal mathematical reasoning benchmark.Furthermore, employing ArXivCap, we devise four vision-to-text tasks for benchmarking LVLMs.Evaluation results with state-of-the-art LVLMs underscore their struggle with the nuanced semantics of academic figures, while domain-specific training yields substantial performance gains.Our error analysis uncovers misinterpretations of visual context, recognition errors, and the production of overly simplified captions by current LVLMs, shedding light on future improvements.
We present a novel human annotated dataset for evaluating the ability for visual-language models to generate both short and long descriptions for real-world video clips, termed {\bf DeVAn} (Dense Video Annotation). The dataset contains 8.5K YouTube video clips of 20-60 seconds in duration and covers a wide range of topics and interests. Each video clip is independently annotated by 5 human annotators, producing both captions (1 sentence) and summaries (3-10 sentences). Given any video selected from the dataset and its corresponding ASR information, we evaluate visual-language models on either caption or summary generation that is grounded in both the visual and auditory content of the video. Additionally, models are also evaluated on caption- and summary-based retrieval tasks, where the summary-based retrieval task requires the identification of a target video given \textit{excerpts} of a given summary. Given the novel nature of the paragraph-length video summarization task, we compared different existing evaluation metrics and their alignment with human preferences and found that model-based evaluation metrics provide more semantically-oriented and human-aligned evaluation. Finally, we benchmarked a wide range of current video-language models on DeVAn, and we aim for DeVAn to serve as a useful evaluation set in the age of large language models and complex multi-modal tasks. Code is available at https://github.com/TK-21st/DeVAn.
Multi-modal Preference Alignment Remedies Degradation of Visual Instruction Tuning on Language Models
PDF ↗Multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) are expected to support multi-turn queries of interchanging image and text modalities in production. However, the current MLLMs trained with visual-question-answering (VQA) datasets could suffer from degradation, as VQA datasets lack the diversity and complexity of the original text instruction datasets with which the underlying language model was trained. To address this degradation, we first collect a lightweight, 5k-sample VQA preference dataset where answers were annotated by Gemini for five quality metrics in a granular fashion and investigate standard Supervised Fine-tuning, rejection sampling, Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and SteerLM algorithms. Our findings indicate that with DPO, we can surpass the instruction-following capabilities of the language model, achieving a 6.73 score on MT-Bench, compared to Vicuna’s 6.57 and LLaVA’s 5.99. This enhancement in textual instruction-following capability correlates with boosted visual instruction performance (+4.9% on MM-Vet, +6% on LLaVA-Bench), with minimal alignment tax on visual knowledge benchmarks compared to the previous RLHF approach. In conclusion, we propose a distillation-based multi-modal alignment model with fine-grained annotations on a small dataset that restores and boosts MLLM’s language capability after visual instruction tuning.
Language Models are Homer Simpson! Safety Re-Alignment of Fine-tuned Language Models through Task Arithmetic
PDF ↗We propose RESTA to perform LLM realignment towards safety, which gets compromised due to downstream task fine-tuning. RESTA stands for REstoring Safety through Task Arithmetic. At its core, it involves a simple arithmetic addition of a safety vector to the weights of the compromised model. We demonstrate the effectiveness of RESTA in both parameter-efficient and full fine-tuning, covering a wide range of downstream tasks, including instruction following in Chinese, English, and Hindi, as well as problem-solving capabilities in Code and Math. We also showcase the generalizability of RESTA on three existing safety evaluation benchmarks and a multilingual benchmark dataset proposed as a part of this work, consisting of 550 harmful questions covering 11 categories, each with 5 sub-categories of harm. Overall, RESTA decreases the harmfulness of the compromised model from 18.6% to 5.1% and from 9.2% to 1.5% in parameter-efficient and full fine-tuning, respectively, while maintaining most of the model’s performance on the task. We release the source codes at: https://github.com/declare-lab/resta.
Social biases in LLMs are usually measured via bias benchmark datasets. Current benchmarks have limitations in scope, grounding, quality, and human effort required. Previous work has shown success with a community-sourced, rather than crowd-sourced, approach to benchmark development. However, this work still required considerable effort from annotators with relevant lived experience. This paper explores whether an LLM (specifically, GPT-3.5-Turbo) can assist with the task of developing a bias benchmark dataset from responses to an open-ended community survey. We also extend the previous work to a new community and set of biases: the Jewish community and antisemitism. Our analysis shows that GPT-3.5-Turbo has poor performance on this annotation task and produces unacceptable quality issues in its output. Thus, we conclude that GPT-3.5-Turbo is not an appropriate substitute for human annotation in sensitive tasks related to social biases, and that its use actually negates many of the benefits of community-sourcing bias benchmarks.