Dr. GPT in Campus Counseling: Understanding Higher Education Students' Opinions on LLM-assisted Mental Health Services

In response to the increasing mental health challenges faced by college students, we sought to understand their perspectives on how AI applications, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), can be leveraged to enhance their mental well-being. Through pilot interviews with ten diverse students, we explored their opinions on the use of LLMs across five fictional scenarios: General Information Inquiry, Initial Screening, Reshaping Patient-Expert Dynamics, Long-term Care, and Follow-up Care. Our findings revealed that students' acceptance of LLMs varied by scenario, with participants highlighting both potential benefits, such as proactive engagement and personalized follow-up care, and concerns, including limitations in training data and emotional support. These insights inform how AI technology should be designed and implemented to effectively support and enhance students' mental well-being, particularly in scenarios where LLMs can complement traditional methods, while maintaining empathy and respecting individual preferences.

Large Language Models Assume People are More Rational than We Really are

In order for AI systems to communicate effectively with people, they must understand how we make decisions. However, people's decisions are not always rational, so the implicit internal models of human decision-making in Large Language Models (LLMs) must account for this. Previous empirical evidence seems to suggest that these implicit models are accurate -- LLMs offer believable proxies of human behavior, acting how we expect humans would in everyday interactions. However, by comparing LLM behavior and predictions to a large dataset of human decisions, we find that this is actually not the case: when both simulating and predicting people's choices, a suite of cutting-edge LLMs (GPT-4o & 4-Turbo, Llama-3-8B & 70B, Claude 3 Opus) assume that people are more rational than we really are. Specifically, these models deviate from human behavior and align more closely with a classic model of rational choice -- expected value theory. Interestingly, people also tend to assume that other people are rational when interpreting their behavior. As a consequence, when we compare the inferences that LLMs and people draw from the decisions of others using another psychological dataset, we find that these inferences are highly correlated. Thus, the implicit decision-making models of LLMs appear to be aligned with the human expectation that other people will act rationally, rather than with how people actually act.

Language Models as Science Tutors

NLP has recently made exciting progress toward training language models (LMs) with strong scientific problem-solving skills. However, model development has not focused on real-life use-cases of LMs for science, including applications in education that require processing long scientific documents. To address this, we introduce TutorEval and TutorChat. TutorEval is a diverse question-answering benchmark consisting of questions about long chapters from STEM textbooks, written by experts. TutorEval helps measure real-life usability of LMs as scientific assistants, and it is the first benchmark combining long contexts, free-form generation, and multi-disciplinary scientific knowledge. Moreover, we show that fine-tuning base models with existing dialogue datasets leads to poor performance on TutorEval. Therefore, we create TutorChat, a dataset of 80,000 long synthetic dialogues about textbooks. We use TutorChat to fine-tune Llemma models with 7B and 34B parameters. These LM tutors specialized in math have a 32K-token context window, and they excel at TutorEval while performing strongly on GSM8K and MATH. Our datasets build on open-source materials, and we release our models, data, and evaluations.

CORGI-PM: A Chinese Corpus For Gender Bias Probing and Mitigation

As natural language processing (NLP) for gender bias becomes a significant interdisciplinary topic, the prevalent data-driven techniques such as large-scale language models suffer from data inadequacy and biased corpus, especially for languages with insufficient resources such as Chinese. To this end, we propose a Chinese cOrpus foR Gender bIas Probing and Mitigation CORGI-PM, which contains 32.9k sentences with high-quality labels derived by following an annotation scheme specifically developed for gender bias in the Chinese context. Moreover, we address three challenges for automatic textual gender bias mitigation, which requires the models to detect, classify, and mitigate textual gender bias. We also conduct experiments with state-of-the-art language models to provide baselines. To our best knowledge, CORGI-PM is the first sentence-level Chinese corpus for gender bias probing and mitigation.