Large language models (LLMs) usually fall short on information extraction (IE) tasks and struggle to follow the complex instructions of IE tasks. This primarily arises from LLMs not being aligned with humans, as mainstream alignment datasets typically do not include IE data. In this paper, we introduce ADELIE (Aligning large language moDELs on Information Extraction), an aligned LLM that effectively solves various IE tasks, including closed IE, open IE, and on-demand IE. We first collect and construct a high-quality alignment corpus IEInstruct for IE. Then we train ADELIE_SFT using instruction tuning on IEInstruct. We further train ADELIE_SFT with direct preference optimization (DPO) objective, resulting in ADELIE_DPO. Extensive experiments on various held-out IE datasets demonstrate that our models (ADELIE_SFT and ADELIE_DPO) achieve state-of-the-art (SoTA) performance among open-source models. We further explore the general capabilities of ADELIE, and experimental results reveal that their general capabilities do not exhibit a noticeable decline. We will release the code, data, and models to facilitate further research.
Providing knowledge documents for large language models (LLMs) has emerged as a promising solution to update the static knowledge inherent in their parameters. However, knowledge in the document may conflict with the memory of LLMs due to outdated or incorrect knowledge in the LLMs' parameters. This leads to the necessity of examining the capability of LLMs to assimilate supplemental external knowledge that conflicts with their memory. While previous studies have explained to what extent LLMs extract conflicting knowledge from the provided text, they neglect the necessity to reason with conflicting knowledge. Furthermore, there lack a detailed analysis on strategies to enable LLMs to resolve conflicting knowledge via prompting, decoding strategy, and supervised fine-tuning. To address these limitations, we construct a new dataset, dubbed KNOT, for knowledge conflict resolution examination in the form of question answering. KNOT facilitates in-depth analysis by dividing reasoning with conflicting knowledge into three levels: (1) Direct Extraction, which directly extracts conflicting knowledge to answer questions. (2) Explicit Reasoning, which reasons with conflicting knowledge when the reasoning path is explicitly provided in the question. (3) Implicit Reasoning, where reasoning with conflicting knowledge requires LLMs to infer the reasoning path independently to answer questions. We also conduct extensive experiments on KNOT to establish empirical guidelines for LLMs to utilize conflicting knowledge in complex circumstances. Dataset and associated codes can be accessed at https://github.com/THU-KEG/KNOT .
Modern Large Language Models (LLMs) have showcased remarkable prowess in various tasks necessitating sophisticated cognitive behaviors. Nevertheless, a paradoxical performance discrepancy is observed, where these models underperform in seemingly elementary tasks like relation extraction and event extraction due to two issues in conventional evaluation. (1) The imprecision of existing evaluation metrics that struggle to effectively gauge semantic consistency between model outputs and ground truth, and (2) The inherent incompleteness of evaluation benchmarks, primarily due to restrictive human annotation schemas, resulting in underestimated LLM performances. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. This method innovatively utilizes LLMs, fine-tuned through subjective question correction data, to refine matching between model outputs and golden labels. Additionally, by incorporating a Natural Language Inference (NLI) model, SQC-Score enriches golden labels, addressing benchmark incompleteness by acknowledging correct yet previously omitted answers. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics. Utilizing SQC-Score, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the state-of-the-art LLMs and provide insights for future research for information extraction. Dataset and associated codes can be accessed at https://github.com/THU-KEG/SQC-Score.
Empowered by the large-scale pretrained language models, existing dialogue systems have demonstrated impressive performance conducting fluent and natural-sounding conversations. However, they are still plagued by the hallucination problem, causing unpredictable factual errors in the generated responses. Recently, knowledge-grounded dialogue generation models, that intentionally invoke external knowledge resources to more informative responses, are also proven to be effective in reducing hallucination. Following the idea of getting high-quality knowledge, a few efforts have achieved pretty good performance on this issue. As some inevitable knowledge noises may also lead to hallucinations, it is emergent to investigate the reason and future directions for building noise-tolerant methods in KGD tasks. In this paper, we analyze the causal story behind this problem with counterfactual reasoning methods. Based on the causal effect analysis, we propose a possible solution for alleviating the hallucination in KGD by exploiting the dialogue-knowledge interaction. Experimental results of our example implementation show that this method can reduce hallucination without disrupting other dialogue performance, while keeping adaptive to different generation models. We hope our efforts can support and call for more attention to developing lightweight techniques towards robust and trusty dialogue systems.
Recent advancements in pretraining have demonstrated that modern Large Language Models (LLMs) possess the capability to effectively learn arithmetic operations. However, despite acknowledging the significance of digit order in arithmetic computation, current methodologies predominantly rely on sequential, step-by-step approaches for teaching LLMs arithmetic, resulting in a conclusion where obtaining better performance involves fine-grained step-by-step. Diverging from this conventional path, our work introduces a novel strategy that not only reevaluates the digit order by prioritizing output from the least significant digit but also incorporates a step-by-step methodology to substantially reduce complexity. We have developed and applied this method in a comprehensive set of experiments. Compared to the previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) method, our findings reveal an overall improvement of in accuracy while requiring only a third of the tokens typically used during training. For the purpose of facilitating replication and further research, we have made our code and dataset publicly available at \url{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/RAIT-9FB7/}.
Knowledge editing aims at updating knowledge of large language models (LLMs) to prevent them from becoming outdated. Existing work edits LLMs at the level of factual knowledge triplets. However, natural knowledge updates in the real world come from the occurrences of new events rather than direct changes in factual triplets. In this paper, we propose a new task setting: event-level knowledge editing, which directly edits new events into LLMs and improves over conventional triplet-level editing on (1) Efficiency. A single event edit leads to updates in multiple entailed knowledge triplets. (2) Completeness. Beyond updating factual knowledge, event-level editing also requires considering the event influences and updating LLMs' knowledge about future trends. We construct a high-quality event-level editing benchmark ELKEN, consisting of 1,515 event edits, 6,449 questions about factual knowledge, and 10,150 questions about future tendencies. We systematically evaluate the performance of various knowledge editing methods and LLMs on this benchmark. We find that ELKEN poses significant challenges to existing knowledge editing approaches. Our codes and dataset are publicly released to facilitate further research.
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have demonstrated their widespread viability thanks to extensive training in aligning visual instructions to answers. However, this conclusive alignment leads models to ignore critical visual reasoning, and further result in failures on meticulous visual problems and unfaithful responses. In this paper, we propose Chain of Manipulations, a mechanism that enables VLMs to solve problems with a series of manipulations, where each manipulation refers to an operation on the visual input, either from intrinsic abilities (e.g., grounding) acquired through prior training or from imitating human-like behaviors (e.g., zoom in). This mechanism encourages VLMs to generate faithful responses with evidential visual reasoning, and permits users to trace error causes in the interpretable paths. We thus train CogCoM, a general 17B VLM with a memory-based compatible architecture endowed this reasoning mechanism. Experiments show that our model achieves the state-of-the-art performance across 8 benchmarks from 3 categories, and a limited number of training steps with the data swiftly gains a competitive performance. The code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/THUDM/CogCoM.
Program induction (PI) has become a promising paradigm for using knowledge bases (KBs) to help large language models (LLMs) answer complex knowledge-intensive questions. Nonetheless, PI typically relies on a large number of parallel question-program pairs to make the LLM aware of the schema of the given KB, and is thus challenging for many low-resourced KBs that lack annotated data. To this end, we propose KB-Plugin, a plug-and-play framework that enables LLMs to induce programs over any low-resourced KB. Firstly, KB-Plugin adopts self-supervised learning to encode the detailed schema information of a given KB into a pluggable module, namely schema plugin. Secondly, KB-Plugin utilizes abundant annotated data from a rich-resourced KB to train another pluggable module, namely PI plugin, which can help the LLM extract question-relevant schema information from the schema plugin of any KB and utilize this information to induce programs over this KB. Experiments on five heterogeneous KBQA datasets show that KB-Plugin achieves better or comparable performance with 25$\times$ smaller backbone LLM compared to SoTA PI methods for low-resourced KBs, and even approaches the performance of supervised methods. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/THU-KEG/KB-Plugin.
Extending large language models to effectively handle long contexts requires instruction fine-tuning on input sequences of similar length. To address this, we present LongAlign -- a recipe of the instruction data, training, and evaluation for long context alignment. First, we construct a long instruction-following dataset using Self-Instruct. To ensure the data diversity, it covers a broad range of tasks from various long context sources. Second, we adopt the packing and sorted batching strategies to speed up supervised fine-tuning on data with varied length distributions. Additionally, we develop a loss weighting method to balance the contribution to the loss across different sequences during packing training. Third, we introduce the LongBench-Chat benchmark for evaluating instruction-following capabilities on queries of 10k-100k in length. Experiments show that LongAlign outperforms existing recipes for LLMs in long context tasks by up to 30\%, while also maintaining their proficiency in handling short, generic tasks. The code, data, and long-aligned models are open-sourced at https://github.com/THUDM/LongAlign.
Recent advancement in the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) has triggered a new surge in LLMs' evaluation. Most recent evaluation works tends to evaluate the comprehensive ability of LLMs over series of tasks. However, the deep structure understanding of natural language is rarely explored. In this work, we examine the ability of LLMs to deal with structured semantics on the tasks of question answering with the help of the human-constructed formal language. Specifically, we implement the inter-conversion of natural and formal language through in-context learning of LLMs to verify their ability to understand and generate the structured logical forms. Extensive experiments with models of different sizes and in different formal languages show that today's state-of-the-art LLMs' understanding of the logical forms can approach human level overall, but there still are plenty of room in generating correct logical forms, which suggest that it is more effective to use LLMs to generate more natural language training data to reinforce a small model than directly answering questions with LLMs. Moreover, our results also indicate that models exhibit considerable sensitivity to different formal languages. In general, the formal language with the lower the formalization level, i.e. the more similar it is to natural language, is more LLMs-friendly.