ymoslem/acl-abstracts huggingface dataset:
BatchEval: Towards Human-like Text Evaluation (2024)

Significant progress has been made in automatic text evaluation with the introduction of large language models (LLMs) as evaluators. However, current sample-wise evaluation paradigm suffers from the following issues: (1) Sensitive to prompt design; (2) Poor resistance to noise; (3) Inferior ensemble performance with static reference. Inspired by the fact that humans treat both criterion definition and inter sample comparison as references for evaluation, we propose BatchEval, a paradigm that conducts batch-wise evaluation iteratively to alleviate the above problems. We explore variants under this paradigm and confirm the optimal settings are two stage procedure with heterogeneous batch composition strategy and decimal scoring format. Comprehensive experiments across 3 LLMs on 4 text evaluation tasks demonstrate that BatchEval outperforms state-of-the-art methods by 10.5{\%} on Pearson correlations with only 64{\%} API cost on average. Further analyses have been conducted to verify the robustness, generalization, and working mechanism of BatchEval.
ToMBench: Benchmarking Theory of Mind in Large Language Models (2024)

Theory of Mind (ToM) is the cognitive capability to perceive and ascribe mental states to oneself and others. Recent research has sparked a debate over whether large language models (LLMs) exhibit a form of ToM. However, existing ToM evaluations are hindered by challenges such as constrained scope, subjective judgment, and unintended contamination, yielding inadequate assessments. To address this gap, we introduce ToMBench with three key characteristics: a systematic evaluation framework encompassing 8 tasks and 31 abilities in social cognition, a multiple-choice question format to support automated and unbiased evaluation, and a build-from-scratch bilingual inventory to strictly avoid data leakage. Based on ToMBench, we conduct extensive experiments to evaluate the ToM performance of 10 popular LLMs across tasks and abilities. We find that even the most advanced LLMs like GPT-4 lag behind human performance by over 10{\%} points, indicating that LLMs have not achieved a human-level theory of mind yet. Our aim with ToMBench is to enable an efficient and effective evaluation of LLMs' ToM capabilities, thereby facilitating the development of LLMs with inherent social intelligence.
COKE: A Cognitive Knowledge Graph for Machine Theory of Mind (2024)

Theory of mind (ToM) refers to humans' ability to understand and infer the desires, beliefs, and intentions of others. The acquisition of ToM plays a key role in humans' social cognition and interpersonal relations. Though indispensable for social intelligence, ToM is still lacking for modern AI and NLP systems since they cannot access the human mental state and cognitive process beneath the training corpus. To empower AI systems with the ToM ability and narrow the gap between them and humans, in this paper, we propose COKE: the first cognitive knowledge graph for machine theory of mind. Specifically, COKE formalizes ToM as a collection of 45k+ manually verified cognitive chains that characterize human mental activities and subsequent behavioral/affective responses when facing specific social circumstances. In addition, we further generalize COKE using LLMs and build a powerful generation model COLM tailored for cognitive reasoning. Experimental results in both automatic and human evaluation demonstrate the high quality of COKE, the superior ToM ability of COLM, and its potential to significantly enhance social applications.
MultiPICo: Multilingual Perspectivist Irony Corpus (2024)

Recently, several scholars have contributed to the growth of a new theoretical framework in NLP called perspectivism. This approach aimsto leverage data annotated by different individuals to model diverse perspectives that affect their opinions on subjective phenomena such as irony. In this context, we propose MultiPICo, a multilingual perspectivist corpus of ironic short conversations in different languages andlinguistic varieties extracted from Twitter and Reddit. The corpus includes sociodemographic information about its annotators. Our analysis of the annotated corpus shows how different demographic cohorts may significantly disagree on their annotation of irony and how certain cultural factors influence the perception of the phenomenon and the agreement on the annotation. Moreover, we show how disaggregated annotations and rich annotator metadata can be exploited to benchmark the ability of large language models to recognize irony, their positionality with respect to sociodemographic groups, and the efficacy of perspective-taking prompting for irony detection in multiple languages.
AppWorld: A Controllable World of Apps and People for Benchmarking Interactive Coding Agents (2024)

Autonomous agents that address day-to-day digital tasks (e.g., ordering groceries for a household), must not only operate multiple apps (e.g., notes, messaging, shopping app) via APIs, but also generate rich code with complex control flow in an iterative manner based on their interaction with the environment. However, existing benchmarks for tool use are inadequate, as they only cover tasks that require a simple sequence of API calls. To remedy this gap, we built AppWorld Engine, a high-quality execution environment (60K lines of code) of 9 day-to-day apps operable via 457 APIs and populated with realistic digital activities simulating the lives of {\textasciitilde}100 fictitious users. We then created AppWorld Benchmark (40K lines of code), a suite of 750 natural, diverse, and challenging autonomous agent tasks requiring rich and interactive code generation. It supports robust programmatic evaluation with state-based unit tests, allowing for different ways of completing a task while also checking for unexpected changes, i.e., collateral damage. The state-of-the-art LLM, GPT4O, solves only {\textasciitilde}49{\%} of our {\textquoteleft}normal' tasks and {\textasciitilde}30{\%} of {\textquoteleft}challenge' tasks, while other models solve at least 16{\%} fewer. This highlights the benchmark`s difficulty and AppWorld`s potential to push the frontiers of interactive coding agents.
MMToM-QA: Multimodal Theory of Mind Question Answering (2024)

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.
DocMath-Eval: Evaluating Math Reasoning Capabilities of LLMs in Understanding Long and Specialized Documents (2024)

Recent LLMs have demonstrated remarkable performance in solving exam-like math word problems. However, the degree to which these numerical reasoning skills are effective in real-world scenarios, particularly in expert domains, is still largely unexplored. This paper introduces DocMath-Eval, a comprehensive benchmark specifically designed to evaluate the numerical reasoning capabilities of LLMs in the context of understanding and analyzing specialized documents containing both text and tables. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 48 LLMs with Chain-of-Thought and Program-of-Thought prompting methods, aiming to comprehensively assess the capabilities and limitations of existing LLMs in DocMath-Eval. We found that even the current best-performing system (i.e., GPT-4o) still significantly lags behind human experts in solving complex numerical reasoning problems grounded in long contexts. We believe that DocMath-Eval can serve as a valuable benchmark for evaluating LLMs' capabilities in solving challenging numerical reasoning problems within expert domains.
Unintended Impacts of LLM Alignment on Global Representation (2024)

Before being deployed for user-facing applications, developers align Large Language Models (LLMs) to user preferences through a variety of procedures, such as Reinforcement Learning From Human Feedback (RLHF) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). Current evaluations of these procedures focus on benchmarks of instruction following, reasoning, and truthfulness. However, human preferences are not universal, and aligning to specific preference sets may have unintended effects. We explore how alignment impacts performance along three axes of global representation: English dialects, multilingualism, and opinions from and about countries worldwide. Our results show that current alignment procedures create disparities between English dialects and global opinions. We find alignment improves capabilities in several languages. We conclude by discussing design decisions that led to these unintended impacts and recommendations for more equitable preference tuning. We make our code and data publicly available on Github.
ICLEF: In-Context Learning with Expert Feedback for Explainable Style Transfer (2024)

While state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) can excel at adapting text from one style to another, current work does not address the explainability of style transfer models. Recent work has explored generating textual explanations from larger teacher models and distilling them into smaller student models. One challenge with such approach is that LLM outputs may contain errors that require expertise to correct, but gathering and incorporating expert feedback is difficult due to cost and availability. To address this challenge, we propose ICLEF, a novel human-AI collaboration approach to model distillation that incorporates scarce expert human feedback by combining in-context learning and model self-critique. We show that our method leads to generation of high-quality synthetic explainable style transfer datasets for formality (E-GYAFC) and subjective bias (E-WNC). Via automatic and human evaluation, we show that specialized student models fine-tuned on our datasets outperform generalist teacher models on the explainable style transfer task in one-shot settings, and perform competitively compared to few-shot teacher models, highlighting the quality of the data and the role of expert feedback. In an extrinsic task of authorship attribution, we show that explanations generated by smaller models fine-tuned on E-GYAFC are more predictive of authorship than explanations generated by few-shot teacher models.
MAP`s not dead yet: Uncovering true language model modes by conditioning away degeneracy (2024)

It has been widely observed that exact or approximate MAP (mode-seeking) decoding from natural language generation (NLG) models consistently leads to degenerate outputs (Holtzman et al., 2019; Stahlberg and Byrne, 2019). Prior work has attributed this behavior to either a fundamental and unavoidable inadequacy of modes in probabilistic models or weaknesses in language modeling. Contrastingly, we argue that degenerate modes can even occur in the absence of any modeling error, due to contamination of the training data. Specifically, we argue that mixing even a tiny amount of low-entropy noise with a population text distribution can cause the data distribution`s mode to become degenerate. We therefore propose to apply MAP decoding to the model`s true conditional distribution where the conditioning variable explicitly avoids specific degenerate behavior. Using exact search, we empirically verify that the length-conditional modes of machine translation models and language models are indeed more fluent and topical than their unconditional modes. For the first time, we also share many examples of exact modal sequences from these models, and from several variants of the LLaMA-7B model. Notably, we observethat various kinds of degenerate modes persist, even at the scale of LLaMA-7B. Although we cannot tractably address these degeneracieswith exact search, we perform a classifier-based approximate search on LLaMA-7B, a model which was not trained for instruction following, and find that we are able to elicit reasonable outputs without any finetuning.
Guardians of the Machine Translation Meta-Evaluation: Sentinel Metrics Fall In! (2024)

Annually, at the Conference of Machine Translation (WMT), the Metrics Shared Task organizers conduct the meta-evaluation of Machine Translation (MT) metrics, ranking them according to their correlation with human judgments. Their results guide researchers toward enhancing the next generation of metrics and MT systems. With the recent introduction of neural metrics, the field has witnessed notable advancements. Nevertheless, the inherent opacity of these metrics has posed substantial challenges to the meta-evaluation process. This work highlights two issues with the meta-evaluation framework currently employed in WMT, and assesses their impact on the metrics rankings. To do this, we introduce the concept of sentinel metrics, which are designed explicitly to scrutinize the meta-evaluation process`s accuracy, robustness, and fairness. By employing sentinel metrics, we aim to validate our findings, and shed light on and monitor the potential biases or inconsistencies in the rankings. We discover that the present meta-evaluation framework favors two categories of metrics: i) those explicitly trained to mimic human quality assessments, and ii) continuous metrics. Finally, we raise concerns regarding the evaluation capabilities of state-of-the-art metrics, emphasizing that they might be basing their assessments on spurious correlations found in their training data.
NounAtlas: Filling the Gap in Nominal Semantic Role Labeling (2024)

Despite significant advances in Semantic Role Labeling (SRL), much work in this field has been carried out with a focus on verbal predicates, with the research on nominal SRL lagging behind. In many contexts, however, nominal predicates are often as informative as verbal ones, thus needing proper treatment. In this paper we aim to fill this gap and make nominal SRL a first-class citizen. We introduce a novel approach to create the first large-scale, high-quality inventory of nominal predicates and organize them into semantically-coherent frames. Although automatically created, NounAtlas {--} our frame inventory {--} is subsequently fully validated. We then put forward a technique to generate silver training data for nominal SRL and show that a state-of-the-art SRL model can achieve good performance. Interestingly, thanks to our design choices which enable seamless integration of our predicate inventory with its verbal counterpart, we can mix verbal and nominal data and perform robust SRL on both types of predicates.
The Earth is Flat because...: Investigating LLMs' Belief towards Misinformation via Persuasive Conversation (2024)

Large language models (LLMs) encapsulate vast amounts of knowledge but still remain vulnerable to external misinformation. Existing research mainly studied this susceptibility behavior in a single-turn setting. However, belief can change during a multi-turn conversation, especially a persuasive one. Therefore, in this study, we delve into LLMs' susceptibility to persuasive conversations, particularly on factual questions that they can answer correctly. We first curate the Farm (i.e., Fact to Misinform) dataset, which contains factual questions paired with systematically generated persuasive misinformation. Then, we develop a testing framework to track LLMs' belief changes in a persuasive dialogue. Through extensive experiments, we find that LLMs' correct beliefs on factual knowledge can be easily manipulated by various persuasive strategies.
LooGLE: Can Long-Context Language Models Understand Long Contexts? (2024)

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 {\textquotedblleft}true long-context understanding{\textquotedblright} ability of LLMs instead of merely enlarging their context window.
Let`s Go Real Talk: Spoken Dialogue Model for Face-to-Face Conversation (2024)

In this paper, we introduce a novel Face-to-Face spoken dialogue model. It processes audio-visual speech from user input and generates audio-visual speech as the response, marking the initial step towards creating an avatar chatbot system without relying on intermediate text. To this end, we newly introduce MultiDialog, the first large-scale multimodal (i.e, audio and visual) spoken dialogue corpus containing 340 hours of approximately 9,000 dialogues, recorded based on the open domain dialogue dataset, TopicalChat. The MultiDialog contains parallel audio-visual recordings of conversation partners acting according to the given script with emotion annotations, which we expect to open up research opportunities in multimodal synthesis. Our Face-to-Face spoken dialogue model incorporates a textually pretrained large language model and adapts it into the audio-visual spoken dialogue domain by incorporating speech-text joint pretraining. Through extensive experiments, we validate the effectiveness of our model in facilitating a face-to-face conversation. Demo and data are available at https://multidialog.github.io and https://huggingface.co/datasets/IVLLab/MultiDialog, respectively.
ECBD: Evidence-Centered Benchmark Design for NLP (2024)

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.
Having Beer after Prayer? Measuring Cultural Bias in Large Language Models (2024)

As the reach of large language models (LMs) expands globally, their ability to cater to diverse cultural contexts becomes crucial. Despite advancements in multilingual capabilities, models are not designed with appropriate cultural nuances. In this paper, we show that multilingual and Arabic monolingual LMs exhibit bias towards entities associated with Western culture. We introduce CAMeL, a novel resource of 628 naturally-occurring prompts and 20,368 entities spanning eight types that contrast Arab and Western cultures. CAMeL provides a foundation for measuring cultural biases in LMs through both extrinsic and intrinsic evaluations. Using CAMeL, we examine the cross-cultural performance in Arabic of 16 different LMs on tasks such as story generation, NER, and sentiment analysis, where we find concerning cases of stereotyping and cultural unfairness. We further test their text-infilling performance, revealing the incapability of appropriate adaptation to Arab cultural contexts. Finally, we analyze 6 Arabic pre-training corpora and find that commonly used sources such as Wikipedia may not be best suited to build culturally aware LMs, if used as they are without adjustment. We will make CAMeL publicly available at: https://github.com/tareknaous/camel
Explicating the Implicit: Argument Detection Beyond Sentence Boundaries (2024)

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.