Abstract:Fact verification (FV) aims to assess the veracity of a claim based on relevant evidence. The traditional approach for automated FV includes a three-part pipeline relying on short evidence snippets and encoder-only inference models. More recent approaches leverage the multi-turn nature of LLMs to address FV as a step-by-step problem where questions inquiring additional context are generated and answered until there is enough information to make a decision. This iterative method makes the verification process rational and explainable. While these methods have been tested for encyclopedic claims, exploration on domain-specific and realistic claims is missing. In this work, we apply an iterative FV system on three medical fact-checking datasets and evaluate it with multiple settings, including different LLMs, external web search, and structured reasoning using logic predicates. We demonstrate improvements in the final performance over traditional approaches and the high potential of step-by-step FV systems for domain-specific claims.
Abstract:Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as an approach to augment large language models (LLMs) by reducing their reliance on static knowledge and improving answer factuality. RAG retrieves relevant context snippets and generates an answer based on them. Despite its increasing industrial adoption, systematic exploration of RAG components is lacking, particularly regarding the ideal size of provided context, and the choice of base LLM and retrieval method. To help guide development of robust RAG systems, we evaluate various context sizes, BM25 and semantic search as retrievers, and eight base LLMs. Moving away from the usual RAG evaluation with short answers, we explore the more challenging long-form question answering in two domains, where a good answer has to utilize the entire context. Our findings indicate that final QA performance improves steadily with up to 15 snippets but stagnates or declines beyond that. Finally, we show that different general-purpose LLMs excel in the biomedical domain than the encyclopedic one, and that open-domain evidence retrieval in large corpora is challenging.
Abstract:Lexical Substitution is the task of replacing a single word in a sentence with a similar one. This should ideally be one that is not necessarily only synonymous, but also fits well into the surrounding context of the target word, while preserving the sentence's grammatical structure. Recent advances in Lexical Substitution have leveraged the masked token prediction task of Pre-trained Language Models to generate replacements for a given word in a sentence. With this technique, we introduce ConCat, a simple augmented approach which utilizes the original sentence to bolster contextual information sent to the model. Compared to existing approaches, it proves to be very effective in guiding the model to make contextually relevant predictions for the target word. Our study includes a quantitative evaluation, measured via sentence similarity and task performance. In addition, we conduct a qualitative human analysis to validate that users prefer the substitutions proposed by our method, as opposed to previous methods. Finally, we test our approach on the prevailing benchmark for Lexical Substitution, CoInCo, revealing potential pitfalls of the benchmark. These insights serve as the foundation for a critical discussion on the way in which Lexical Substitution is evaluated.
Abstract:Knowledge-enhanced language models (KELMs) have emerged as promising tools to bridge the gap between large-scale language models and domain-specific knowledge. KELMs can achieve higher factual accuracy and mitigate hallucinations by leveraging knowledge graphs (KGs). They are frequently combined with adapter modules to reduce the computational load and risk of catastrophic forgetting. In this paper, we conduct a systematic literature review (SLR) on adapter-based approaches to KELMs. We provide a structured overview of existing methodologies in the field through quantitative and qualitative analysis and explore the strengths and potential shortcomings of individual approaches. We show that general knowledge and domain-specific approaches have been frequently explored along with various adapter architectures and downstream tasks. We particularly focused on the popular biomedical domain, where we provided an insightful performance comparison of existing KELMs. We outline the main trends and propose promising future directions.
Abstract:Given the growing trend of many organizations integrating Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) into their operations, we assess RAG on domain-specific data and test state-of-the-art models across various optimization techniques. We incorporate four optimizations; Multi-Query, Child-Parent-Retriever, Ensemble Retriever, and In-Context-Learning, to enhance the functionality and performance in the academic domain. We focus on data retrieval, specifically targeting various study programs at a large technical university. We additionally introduce a novel evaluation approach, the RAG Confusion Matrix designed to assess the effectiveness of various configurations within the RAG framework. By exploring the integration of both open-source (e.g., Llama2, Mistral) and closed-source (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) Large Language Models, we offer valuable insights into the application and optimization of RAG frameworks in domain-specific contexts. Our experiments show a significant performance increase when including multi-query in the retrieval phase.
Abstract:The increasing popularity of Large Language Models (LLMs) in recent years has changed the way users interact with and pose questions to AI-based conversational systems. An essential aspect for increasing the trustworthiness of generated LLM answers is the ability to trace the individual claims from responses back to relevant sources that support them, the process known as answer attribution. While recent work has started exploring the task of answer attribution in LLMs, some challenges still remain. In this work, we first perform a case study analyzing the effectiveness of existing answer attribution methods, with a focus on subtasks of answer segmentation and evidence retrieval. Based on the observed shortcomings, we propose new methods for producing more independent and contextualized claims for better retrieval and attribution. The new methods are evaluated and shown to improve the performance of answer attribution components. We end with a discussion and outline of future directions for the task.
Abstract:The task of text privatization using Differential Privacy has recently taken the form of $\textit{text rewriting}$, in which an input text is obfuscated via the use of generative (large) language models. While these methods have shown promising results in the ability to preserve privacy, these methods rely on autoregressive models which lack a mechanism to contextualize the private rewriting process. In response to this, we propose $\textbf{DP-MLM}$, a new method for differentially private text rewriting based on leveraging masked language models (MLMs) to rewrite text in a semantically similar $\textit{and}$ obfuscated manner. We accomplish this with a simple contextualization technique, whereby we rewrite a text one token at a time. We find that utilizing encoder-only MLMs provides better utility preservation at lower $\varepsilon$ levels, as compared to previous methods relying on larger models with a decoder. In addition, MLMs allow for greater customization of the rewriting mechanism, as opposed to generative approaches. We make the code for $\textbf{DP-MLM}$ public and reusable, found at https://github.com/sjmeis/DPMLM .
Abstract:In recent years, Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated an impressive ability to encode knowledge during pre-training on large text corpora. They can leverage this knowledge for downstream tasks like question answering (QA), even in complex areas involving health topics. Considering their high potential for facilitating clinical work in the future, understanding the quality of encoded medical knowledge and its recall in LLMs is an important step forward. In this study, we examine the capability of LLMs to exhibit medical knowledge recall by constructing a novel dataset derived from systematic reviews -- studies synthesizing evidence-based answers for specific medical questions. Through experiments on the new MedREQAL dataset, comprising question-answer pairs extracted from rigorous systematic reviews, we assess six LLMs, such as GPT and Mixtral, analyzing their classification and generation performance. Our experimental insights into LLM performance on the novel biomedical QA dataset reveal the still challenging nature of this task.
Abstract:In recent years, the field of Legal Tech has risen in prevalence, as the Natural Language Processing (NLP) and legal disciplines have combined forces to digitalize legal processes. Amidst the steady flow of research solutions stemming from the NLP domain, the study of use cases has fallen behind, leading to a number of innovative technical methods without a place in practice. In this work, we aim to build a structured overview of Legal Tech use cases, grounded in NLP literature, but also supplemented by voices from legal practice in Germany. Based upon a Systematic Literature Review, we identify seven categories of NLP technologies for the legal domain, which are then studied in juxtaposition to 22 legal use cases. In the investigation of these use cases, we identify 15 ethical, legal, and social aspects (ELSA), shedding light on the potential concerns of digitally transforming the legal domain.
Abstract:In today's digital world, seeking answers to health questions on the Internet is a common practice. However, existing question answering (QA) systems often rely on using pre-selected and annotated evidence documents, thus making them inadequate for addressing novel questions. Our study focuses on the open-domain QA setting, where the key challenge is to first uncover relevant evidence in large knowledge bases. By utilizing the common retrieve-then-read QA pipeline and PubMed as a trustworthy collection of medical research documents, we answer health questions from three diverse datasets. We modify different retrieval settings to observe their influence on the QA pipeline's performance, including the number of retrieved documents, sentence selection process, the publication year of articles, and their number of citations. Our results reveal that cutting down on the amount of retrieved documents and favoring more recent and highly cited documents can improve the final macro F1 score up to 10%. We discuss the results, highlight interesting examples, and outline challenges for future research, like managing evidence disagreement and crafting user-friendly explanations.