Abstract:The integration of tabular data from diverse sources is often hindered by inconsistencies in formatting and representation, posing significant challenges for data analysts and personal digital assistants. Existing methods for automating tabular data transformations are limited in scope, often focusing on specific types of transformations or lacking interpretability. In this paper, we introduce TabulaX, a novel framework that leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) for multi-class tabular transformations. TabulaX first classifies input tables into four transformation classes (string-based, numerical, algorithmic, and general) and then applies tailored methods to generate human-interpretable transformation functions, such as numeric formulas or programming code. This approach enhances transparency and allows users to understand and modify the mappings. Through extensive experiments on real-world datasets from various domains, we demonstrate that TabulaX outperforms existing state-of-the-art approaches in terms of accuracy, supports a broader class of transformations, and generates interpretable transformations that can be efficiently applied.
Abstract:Online reviews play a pivotal role in influencing consumer decisions across various domains, from purchasing products to selecting hotels or restaurants. However, the sheer volume of reviews -- often containing repetitive or irrelevant content -- leads to information overload, making it challenging for users to extract meaningful insights. Traditional opinion summarization models face challenges in handling long inputs and large volumes of reviews, while newer Large Language Model (LLM) approaches often fail to generate accurate and faithful summaries. To address those challenges, this paper introduces (1) a new dataset of long-form user reviews, each entity comprising over a thousand reviews, (2) two training-free LLM-based summarization approaches that scale to long inputs, and (3) automatic evaluation metrics. Our dataset of user reviews is paired with in-depth and unbiased critical summaries by domain experts, serving as a reference for evaluation. Additionally, our novel reference-free evaluation metrics provide a more granular, context-sensitive assessment of summary faithfulness. We benchmark several open-source and closed-source LLMs using our methods. Our evaluation reveals that LLMs still face challenges in balancing sentiment and format adherence in long-form summaries, though open-source models can narrow the gap when relevant information is retrieved in a focused manner.
Abstract:Recent studies highlight the potential of large language models in creating educational tools for children, yet significant challenges remain in maintaining key child-specific properties such as linguistic nuances, cognitive needs, and safety standards. In this paper, we explore foundational steps toward the development of child-specific language models, emphasizing the necessity of high-quality pre-training data. We introduce a novel user-centric data collection pipeline that involves gathering and validating a corpus specifically written for and sometimes by children. Additionally, we propose a new training objective, Stratified Masking, which dynamically adjusts masking probabilities based on our domain-specific child language data, enabling models to prioritize vocabulary and concepts more suitable for children. Experimental evaluations demonstrate that our model excels in understanding lower grade-level text, maintains safety by avoiding stereotypes, and captures children's unique preferences. Furthermore, we provide actionable insights for future research and development in child-specific language modeling.
Abstract:In recent years, Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in parsing textual data and generating code. However, their performance in tasks involving tabular data, especially those requiring symbolic reasoning, faces challenges due to the structural variance and inconsistency in table cell values often found in web tables. In this paper, we introduce NormTab, a novel framework aimed at enhancing the symbolic reasoning performance of LLMs by normalizing web tables. We study table normalization as a stand-alone, one-time preprocessing step using LLMs to support symbolic reasoning on tabular data. Our experimental evaluation, conducted on challenging web table datasets such as WikiTableQuestion and TabFact, demonstrates that leveraging NormTab significantly improves symbolic reasoning performance, showcasing the importance and effectiveness of web table normalization for enhancing LLM-based symbolic reasoning tasks.
Abstract:Table reasoning is a challenging task that requires understanding both natural language questions and structured tabular data. Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities in natural language understanding and generation, but they often struggle with large tables due to their limited input length. In this paper, we propose TabSQLify, a novel method that leverages text-to-SQL generation to decompose tables into smaller and relevant sub-tables, containing only essential information for answering questions or verifying statements, before performing the reasoning task. In our comprehensive evaluation on four challenging datasets, our approach demonstrates comparable or superior performance compared to prevailing methods reliant on full tables as input. Moreover, our method can reduce the input context length significantly, making it more scalable and efficient for large-scale table reasoning applications. Our method performs remarkably well on the WikiTQ benchmark, achieving an accuracy of 64.7%. Additionally, on the TabFact benchmark, it achieves a high accuracy of 79.5%. These results surpass other LLM-based baseline models on gpt-3.5-turbo (chatgpt). TabSQLify can reduce the table size significantly alleviating the computational load on LLMs when handling large tables without compromising performance.
Abstract:Detecting structural similarity between queries is essential for selecting examples in in-context learning models. However, assessing structural similarity based solely on the natural language expressions of queries, without considering SQL queries, presents a significant challenge. This paper explores the significance of this similarity metric and proposes a model for accurately estimating it. To achieve this, we leverage a dataset comprising 170k question pairs, meticulously curated to train a similarity prediction model. Our comprehensive evaluation demonstrates that the proposed model adeptly captures the structural similarity between questions, as evidenced by improvements in Kendall-Tau distance and precision@k metrics. Notably, our model outperforms strong competitive embedding models from OpenAI and Cohere. Furthermore, compared to these competitive models, our proposed encoder enhances the downstream performance of NL2SQL models in 1-shot in-context learning scenarios by 1-2\% for GPT-3.5-turbo, 4-8\% for CodeLlama-7B, and 2-3\% for CodeLlama-13B.
Abstract:Leading models for the text-to-SQL task heavily rely on proprietary Large Language Models (LLMs), posing concerns over data privacy. Closing the performance gap between small open-source models and large proprietary models is crucial to mitigate this reliance. To this end, we introduce a novel two-stage fine-tuning approach that decomposes the task into two simpler tasks. Through comprehensive evaluation on two large cross-domain datasets and two small LLMs, we show that this approach improves execution accuracy by 3 to 7 percent, effectively aligning the performance of open-source models with their proprietary counterparts.
Abstract:Text-to-SQL benchmarks play a crucial role in evaluating the progress made in the field and the ranking of different models. However, accurately matching a model-generated SQL query to a reference SQL query in a benchmark fails for various reasons, such as underspecified natural language queries, inherent assumptions in both model-generated and reference queries, and the non-deterministic nature of SQL output under certain conditions. In this paper, we conduct an extensive study of several prominent cross-domain text-to-SQL benchmarks and re-evaluate some of the top-performing models within these benchmarks, by both manually evaluating the SQL queries and rewriting them in equivalent expressions. Our evaluation reveals that attaining a perfect performance on these benchmarks is unfeasible due to the multiple interpretations that can be derived from the provided samples. Furthermore, we find that the true performance of the models is underestimated and their relative performance changes after a re-evaluation. Most notably, our evaluation reveals a surprising discovery: a recent GPT4-based model surpasses the gold standard reference queries in the Spider benchmark in our human evaluation. This finding highlights the importance of interpreting benchmark evaluations cautiously, while also acknowledging the critical role of additional independent evaluations in driving advancements in the field.
Abstract:We study the problem of Query Performance Prediction (QPP) for open-domain multi-hop Question Answering (QA), where the task is to estimate the difficulty of evaluating a multi-hop question over a corpus. Despite the extensive research on predicting the performance of ad-hoc and QA retrieval models, there has been a lack of study on the estimation of the difficulty of multi-hop questions. The problem is challenging due to the multi-step nature of the retrieval process, potential dependency of the steps and the reasoning involved. To tackle this challenge, we propose multHP, a novel pre-retrieval method for predicting the performance of open-domain multi-hop questions. Our extensive evaluation on the largest multi-hop QA dataset using several modern QA systems shows that the proposed model is a strong predictor of the performance, outperforming traditional single-hop QPP models. Additionally, we demonstrate that our approach can be effectively used to optimize the parameters of QA systems, such as the number of documents to be retrieved, resulting in improved overall retrieval performance.
Abstract:Lexical matching remains the de facto evaluation method for open-domain question answering (QA). Unfortunately, lexical matching fails completely when a plausible candidate answer does not appear in the list of gold answers, which is increasingly the case as we shift from extractive to generative models. The recent success of large language models (LLMs) for QA aggravates lexical matching failures since candidate answers become longer, thereby making matching with the gold answers even more challenging. Without accurate evaluation, the true progress in open-domain QA remains unknown. In this paper, we conduct a thorough analysis of various open-domain QA models, including LLMs, by manually evaluating their answers on a subset of NQ-open, a popular benchmark. Our assessments reveal that while the true performance of all models is significantly underestimated, the performance of the InstructGPT (zero-shot) LLM increases by nearly +60%, making it on par with existing top models, and the InstructGPT (few-shot) model actually achieves a new state-of-the-art on NQ-open. We also find that more than 50% of lexical matching failures are attributed to semantically equivalent answers. We further demonstrate that regex matching ranks QA models consistent with human judgments, although still suffering from unnecessary strictness. Finally, we demonstrate that automated evaluation models are a reasonable surrogate for lexical matching in some circumstances, but not for long-form answers generated by LLMs. The automated models struggle in detecting hallucinations in LLM answers and are thus unable to evaluate LLMs. At this time, there appears to be no substitute for human evaluation.