Eliciting Critical Reasoning in Retrieval-Augmented Language Models via Contrastive Explanations

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as a critical mechanism in contemporary NLP to support Large Language Models(LLMs) in systematically accessing richer factual context. However, the integration of RAG mechanisms brings its inherent challenges, as LLMs need to deal with potentially noisy contexts. Recent studies have shown that LLMs still struggle to critically analyse RAG-based in-context information, a limitation that may lead to incorrect inferences and hallucinations. In this paper, we investigate how to elicit critical reasoning in RAG via contrastive explanations. In particular, we propose Contrastive-RAG (C-RAG), a framework that (i) retrieves relevant documents given a query, (ii) selects and exemplifies relevant passages, and (iii) generates explanations that explicitly contrast the relevance of the passages to (iv) support the final answer. We show the impact of C-RAG building contrastive reasoning demonstrations from LLMs to instruct smaller models for retrieval-augmented tasks. Extensive experiments demonstrate that C-RAG improves state-of-the-art RAG models while (a) requiring significantly fewer prompts and demonstrations and (b) being robust to perturbations in the retrieved documents.

Animate, or Inanimate, That is the Question for Large Language Models

The cognitive essence of humans is deeply intertwined with the concept of animacy, which plays an essential role in shaping their memory, vision, and multi-layered language understanding. Although animacy appears in language via nuanced constraints on verbs and adjectives, it is also learned and refined through extralinguistic information. Similarly, we assume that the LLMs' limited abilities to understand natural language when processing animacy are motivated by the fact that these models are trained exclusively on text. Hence, the question this paper aims to answer arises: can LLMs, in their digital wisdom, process animacy in a similar way to what humans would do? We then propose a systematic analysis via prompting approaches. In particular, we probe different LLMs by prompting them using animate, inanimate, usual, and stranger contexts. Results reveal that, although LLMs have been trained predominantly on textual data, they exhibit human-like behavior when faced with typical animate and inanimate entities in alignment with earlier studies. Hence, LLMs can adapt to understand unconventional situations by recognizing oddities as animated without needing to interface with unspoken cognitive triggers humans rely on to break down animations.

Self-Refine Instruction-Tuning for Aligning Reasoning in Language Models

The alignments of reasoning abilities between smaller and larger Language Models are largely conducted via Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) using demonstrations generated from robust Large Language Models (LLMs). Although these approaches deliver more performant models, they do not show sufficiently strong generalization ability as the training only relies on the provided demonstrations. In this paper, we propose the Self-refine Instruction-tuning method that elicits Smaller Language Models to self-refine their abilities. Our approach is based on a two-stage process, where reasoning abilities are first transferred between LLMs and Small Language Models (SLMs) via Instruction-tuning on demonstrations provided by LLMs, and then the instructed models Self-refine their abilities through preference optimization strategies. In particular, the second phase operates refinement heuristics based on the Direct Preference Optimization algorithm, where the SLMs are elicited to deliver a series of reasoning paths by automatically sampling the generated responses and providing rewards using ground truths from the LLMs. Results obtained on commonsense and math reasoning tasks show that this approach significantly outperforms Instruction-tuning in both in-domain and out-domain scenarios, aligning the reasoning abilities of Smaller and Larger Language Models.

Investigating the Impact of Data Contamination of Large Language Models in Text-to-SQL Translation

Understanding textual description to generate code seems to be an achieved capability of instruction-following Large Language Models (LLMs) in zero-shot scenario. However, there is a severe possibility that this translation ability may be influenced by having seen target textual descriptions and the related code. This effect is known as Data Contamination. In this study, we investigate the impact of Data Contamination on the performance of GPT-3.5 in the Text-to-SQL code-generating tasks. Hence, we introduce a novel method to detect Data Contamination in GPTs and examine GPT-3.5's Text-to-SQL performances using the known Spider Dataset and our new unfamiliar dataset Termite. Furthermore, we analyze GPT-3.5's efficacy on databases with modified information via an adversarial table disconnection (ATD) approach, complicating Text-to-SQL tasks by removing structural pieces of information from the database. Our results indicate a significant performance drop in GPT-3.5 on the unfamiliar Termite dataset, even with ATD modifications, highlighting the effect of Data Contamination on LLMs in Text-to-SQL translation tasks.

When Large Language Models contradict humans? Large Language Models' Sycophantic Behaviour

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been demonstrating the ability to solve complex tasks by delivering answers that are positively evaluated by humans due in part to the intensive use of human feedback that refines responses. However, the suggestibility transmitted through human feedback increases the inclination to produce responses that correspond to the user's beliefs or misleading prompts as opposed to true facts, a behaviour known as sycophancy. This phenomenon decreases the bias, robustness, and, consequently, their reliability. In this paper, we shed light on the suggestibility of LLMs to sycophantic behaviour, demonstrating these tendencies via human-influenced prompts over different tasks. Our investigation reveals that LLMs show sycophantic tendencies when responding to queries involving subjective opinions and statements that should elicit a contrary response based on facts, demonstrating a lack of robustness.

Empowering Multi-step Reasoning across Languages via Tree-of-Thoughts

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting empowers the reasoning abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), eliciting them to solve complex reasoning tasks step-by-step. However, with the success of CoT methods, the ability to deliver multi-step reasoning remains limited to English due to the imbalance in the distribution of the pre-training data, making the other languages a barrier. In this work, we propose a Cross-lingual multi-step reasoning approach, aiming to align reasoning processes across different languages. In particular, our method, through a Self-consistent Cross-lingual prompting mechanism inspired by the Tree-of-Thoughts approach, delivers multi-step reasoning paths in different languages that, during the steps, lead to the final solution. Our experimental evaluations show that our method significantly outperforms existing prompting methods, reducing the number of interactions and achieving state-of-the-art performance.

HANS, are you clever? Clever Hans Effect Analysis of Neural Systems

Instruction-tuned Large Language Models (It-LLMs) have been exhibiting outstanding abilities to reason around cognitive states, intentions, and reactions of all people involved, letting humans guide and comprehend day-to-day social interactions effectively. In fact, several multiple-choice questions (MCQ) benchmarks have been proposed to construct solid assessments of the models' abilities. However, earlier works are demonstrating the presence of inherent "order bias" in It-LLMs, posing challenges to the appropriate evaluation. In this paper, we investigate It-LLMs' resilience abilities towards a series of probing tests using four MCQ benchmarks. Introducing adversarial examples, we show a significant performance gap, mainly when varying the order of the choices, which reveals a selection bias and brings into discussion reasoning abilities. Following a correlation between first positions and model choices due to positional bias, we hypothesized the presence of structural heuristics in the decision-making process of the It-LLMs, strengthened by including significant examples in few-shot scenarios. Finally, by using the Chain-of-Thought (CoT) technique, we elicit the model to reason and mitigate the bias by obtaining more robust models.

Empowering Cross-lingual Abilities of Instruction-tuned Large Language Models by Translation-following demonstrations

The language ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) is often unbalanced towards English because of the imbalance in the distribution of the pre-training data. This disparity is demanded in further fine-tuning and affecting the cross-lingual abilities of LLMs. In this paper, we propose to empower Instructiontuned LLMs (It-LLMs) in languages other than English by building semantic alignment between them. Hence, we propose CrossAlpaca, an It-LLM with cross-lingual instruction-following and Translation-following demonstrations to improve semantic alignment between languages. We validate our approach on the multilingual Question Answering (QA) benchmarks XQUAD and MLQA and adapted versions of MMLU and BBH. Our models, tested over six different languages, outperform the It-LLMs tuned on monolingual data. The final results show that instruction tuning on non-English data is not enough and that semantic alignment can be further improved by Translation-following demonstrations.

A Trip Towards Fairness: Bias and De-Biasing in Large Language Models

An outbreak in the popularity of transformer-based Language Models (such as GPT (Brown et al., 2020) and PaLM (Chowdhery et al., 2022)) has opened the doors to new Machine Learning applications. In particular, in Natural Language Processing and how pre-training from large text, corpora is essential in achieving remarkable results in downstream tasks. However, these Language Models seem to have inherent biases toward certain demographics reflected in their training data. While research has attempted to mitigate this problem, existing methods either fail to remove bias altogether, degrade performance, or are expensive. This paper examines the bias produced by promising Language Models when varying parameters and pre-training data. Finally, we propose a de-biasing technique that produces robust de-bias models that maintain performance on downstream tasks.

PreCog: Exploring the Relation between Memorization and Performance in Pre-trained Language Models

Pre-trained Language Models such as BERT are impressive machines with the ability to memorize, possibly generalized learning examples. We present here a small, focused contribution to the analysis of the interplay between memorization and performance of BERT in downstream tasks. We propose PreCog, a measure for evaluating memorization from pre-training, and we analyze its correlation with the BERT's performance. Our experiments show that highly memorized examples are better classified, suggesting memorization is an essential key to success for BERT.