Abstract:Pursuing artificial intelligence for biomedical science, a.k.a. AI Scientist, draws increasing attention, where one common approach is to build a copilot agent driven by Large Language Models (LLMs). However, to evaluate such systems, people either rely on direct Question-Answering (QA) to the LLM itself, or in a biomedical experimental manner. How to precisely benchmark biomedical agents from an AI Scientist perspective remains largely unexplored. To this end, we draw inspiration from one most important abilities of scientists, understanding the literature, and introduce BioKGBench. In contrast to traditional evaluation benchmark that only focuses on factual QA, where the LLMs are known to have hallucination issues, we first disentangle "Understanding Literature" into two atomic abilities, i) "Understanding" the unstructured text from research papers by performing scientific claim verification, and ii) Ability to interact with structured Knowledge-Graph Question-Answering (KGQA) as a form of "Literature" grounding. We then formulate a novel agent task, dubbed KGCheck, using KGQA and domain-based Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to identify the factual errors of existing large-scale knowledge graph databases. We collect over two thousand data for two atomic tasks and 225 high-quality annotated data for the agent task. Surprisingly, we discover that state-of-the-art agents, both daily scenarios and biomedical ones, have either failed or inferior performance on our benchmark. We then introduce a simple yet effective baseline, dubbed BKGAgent. On the widely used popular knowledge graph, we discover over 90 factual errors which provide scenarios for agents to make discoveries and demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. The code and data are available at https://github.com/westlake-autolab/BioKGBench.
Abstract:The advancement of large language models (LLMs) has significantly propelled the field of code generation. Previous work integrated reinforcement learning (RL) with compiler feedback for exploring the output space of LLMs to enhance code generation quality. However, the lengthy code generated by LLMs in response to complex human requirements makes RL exploration a challenge. Also, since the unit tests may not cover the complicated code, optimizing LLMs by using these unexecuted code snippets is ineffective. To tackle these challenges, we introduce StepCoder, a novel RL framework for code generation, consisting of two main components: CCCS addresses the exploration challenge by breaking the long sequences code generation task into a Curriculum of Code Completion Subtasks, while FGO only optimizes the model by masking the unexecuted code segments to provide Fine-Grained Optimization. In addition, we furthermore construct the APPS+ dataset for RL training, which is manually verified to ensure the correctness of unit tests. Experimental results show that our method improves the ability to explore the output space and outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in corresponding benchmarks. Our dataset APPS+ and StepCoder are available online.
Abstract:Dataset bias, i.e., the over-reliance on dataset-specific literal heuristics, is getting increasing attention for its detrimental effect on the generalization ability of NLU models. Existing works focus on eliminating dataset bias by down-weighting problematic data in the training process, which induce the omission of valid feature information while mitigating bias. In this work, We analyze the causes of dataset bias from the perspective of causal inference and propose CausalAPM, a generalizable literal disentangling framework to ameliorate the bias problem from feature granularity. The proposed approach projects literal and semantic information into independent feature subspaces, and constrains the involvement of literal information in subsequent predictions. Extensive experiments on three NLP benchmarks (MNLI, FEVER, and QQP) demonstrate that our proposed framework significantly improves the OOD generalization performance while maintaining ID performance.