Superalignment with Dynamic Human Values

Two core challenges of alignment are 1) scalable oversight and 2) accounting for the dynamic nature of human values. While solutions like recursive reward modeling address 1), they do not simultaneously account for 2). We sketch a roadmap for a novel algorithmic framework that trains a superhuman reasoning model to decompose complex tasks into subtasks that are still amenable to human-level guidance. Our approach relies on what we call the part-to-complete generalization hypothesis, which states that the alignment of subtask solutions generalizes to the alignment of complete solutions. We advocate for the need to measure this generalization and propose ways to improve it in the future.

Funzac at CoMeDi Shared Task: Modeling Annotator Disagreement from Word-In-Context Perspectives

In this work, we evaluate annotator disagreement in Word-in-Context (WiC) tasks exploring the relationship between contextual meaning and disagreement as part of the CoMeDi shared task competition. While prior studies have modeled disagreement by analyzing annotator attributes with single-sentence inputs, this shared task incorporates WiC to bridge the gap between sentence-level semantic representation and annotator judgment variability. We describe three different methods that we developed for the shared task, including a feature enrichment approach that combines concatenation, element-wise differences, products, and cosine similarity, Euclidean and Manhattan distances to extend contextual embedding representations, a transformation by Adapter blocks to obtain task-specific representations of contextual embeddings, and classifiers of varying complexities, including ensembles. The comparison of our methods demonstrates improved performance for methods that include enriched and task-specfic features. While the performance of our method falls short in comparison to the best system in subtask 1 (OGWiC), it is competitive to the official evaluation results in subtask 2 (DisWiC).

Do LLMs Provide Consistent Answers to Health-Related Questions across Languages?

Equitable access to reliable health information is vital for public health, but the quality of online health resources varies by language, raising concerns about inconsistencies in Large Language Models (LLMs) for healthcare. In this study, we examine the consistency of responses provided by LLMs to health-related questions across English, German, Turkish, and Chinese. We largely expand the HealthFC dataset by categorizing health-related questions by disease type and broadening its multilingual scope with Turkish and Chinese translations. We reveal significant inconsistencies in responses that could spread healthcare misinformation. Our main contributions are 1) a multilingual health-related inquiry dataset with meta-information on disease categories, and 2) a novel prompt-based evaluation workflow that enables sub-dimensional comparisons between two languages through parsing. Our findings highlight key challenges in deploying LLM-based tools in multilingual contexts and emphasize the need for improved cross-lingual alignment to ensure accurate and equitable healthcare information.

The Muddy Waters of Modeling Empathy in Language: The Practical Impacts of Theoretical Constructs

Conceptual operationalizations of empathy in NLP are varied, with some having specific behaviors and properties, while others are more abstract. How these variations relate to one another and capture properties of empathy observable in text remains unclear. To provide insight into this, we analyze the transfer performance of empathy models adapted to empathy tasks with different theoretical groundings. We study (1) the dimensionality of empathy definitions, (2) the correspondence between the defined dimensions and measured/observed properties, and (3) the conduciveness of the data to represent them, finding they have a significant impact to performance compared to other transfer setting features. Characterizing the theoretical grounding of empathy tasks as direct, abstract, or adjacent further indicates that tasks that directly predict specified empathy components have higher transferability. Our work provides empirical evidence for the need for precise and multidimensional empathy operationalizations.

Exploring Robustness of Multilingual LLMs on Real-World Noisy Data

Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained on Web data that might contain spelling errors made by humans. But do they become robust to similar real-world noise? In this paper, we investigate the effect of real-world spelling mistakes on the performance of 9 language models, with parameters ranging from 0.2B to 13B, in 3 different NLP tasks, namely Natural Language Inference (NLI), Name Entity Recognition (NER), and Intent Classification (IC). We perform our experiments on 6 different languages and build a dictionary of real-world noise for them using the Wikipedia edit history. We show that the performance gap of the studied models on the clean and noisy test data averaged across all the datasets and languages ranges from 2.3 to 4.3 absolute percentage points. In addition, mT5 models, in general, show more robustness compared to BLOOM, Falcon, and BERT-like models. In particular, mT5 (13B), was the most robust on average overall, across the 3 tasks, and in 4 of the 6 languages.

ArithmAttack: Evaluating Robustness of LLMs to Noisy Context in Math Problem Solving

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities in math problem-solving tasks, their robustness to noisy inputs is not well-studied. In this work, we propose ArithmAttack to examine how robust the LLMs are when they encounter noisy prompts that contain extra noise in the form of punctuation marks. While being easy to implement, ArithmAttack does not cause any information loss since words are not added or deleted from the context. We evaluate the robustness of seven LLMs, including LLama3, Mistral, and Mathstral, on noisy GSM8K and MultiArith datasets. Our experiments suggest that all the studied models show vulnerability to such noise, with more noise leading to poorer performances.

Exploring Robustness of LLMs to Sociodemographically-Conditioned Paraphrasing

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance in various NLP tasks. However, there are concerns about their reliability in different domains of linguistic variations. Many works have proposed robustness evaluation measures for local adversarial attacks, but we need globally robust models unbiased to different language styles. We take a broader approach to explore a wider range of variations across sociodemographic dimensions to perform structured reliability tests on the reasoning capacity of language models. We extend the SocialIQA dataset to create diverse paraphrased sets conditioned on sociodemographic styles. The assessment aims to provide a deeper understanding of LLMs in (a) their capability of generating demographic paraphrases with engineered prompts and (b) their reasoning capabilities in real-world, complex language scenarios. We also explore measures such as perplexity, explainability, and ATOMIC performance of paraphrases for fine-grained reliability analysis of LLMs on these sets. We find that demographic-specific paraphrasing significantly impacts the performance of language models, indicating that the subtleties of language variations remain a significant challenge. The code and dataset will be made available for reproducibility and future research.

Enforcing Fundamental Relations via Adversarial Attacks on Input Parameter Correlations

Correlations between input parameters play a crucial role in many scientific classification tasks, since these are often related to fundamental laws of nature. For example, in high energy physics, one of the common deep learning use-cases is the classification of signal and background processes in particle collisions. In many such cases, the fundamental principles of the correlations between observables are often better understood than the actual distributions of the observables themselves. In this work, we present a new adversarial attack algorithm called Random Distribution Shuffle Attack (RDSA), emphasizing the correlations between observables in the network rather than individual feature characteristics. Correct application of the proposed novel attack can result in a significant improvement in classification performance - particularly in the context of data augmentation - when using the generated adversaries within adversarial training. Given that correlations between input features are also crucial in many other disciplines. We demonstrate the RDSA effectiveness on six classification tasks, including two particle collision challenges (using CERN Open Data), hand-written digit recognition (MNIST784), human activity recognition (HAR), weather forecasting (Rain in Australia), and ICU patient mortality (MIMIC-IV), demonstrating a general use case beyond fundamental physics for this new type of adversarial attack algorithms.

Unifying the Extremes: Developing a Unified Model for Detecting and Predicting Extremist Traits and Radicalization

The proliferation of ideological movements into extremist factions via social media has become a global concern. While radicalization has been studied extensively within the context of specific ideologies, our ability to accurately characterize extremism in more generalizable terms remains underdeveloped. In this paper, we propose a novel method for extracting and analyzing extremist discourse across a range of online community forums. By focusing on verbal behavioral signatures of extremist traits, we develop a framework for quantifying extremism at both user and community levels. Our research identifies 11 distinct factors, which we term ``The Extremist Eleven,'' as a generalized psychosocial model of extremism. Applying our method to various online communities, we demonstrate an ability to characterize ideologically diverse communities across the 11 extremist traits. We demonstrate the power of this method by analyzing user histories from members of the incel community. We find that our framework accurately predicts which users join the incel community up to 10 months before their actual entry with an AUC of $>0.6$, steadily increasing to AUC ~0.9 three to four months before the event. Further, we find that upon entry into an extremist forum, the users tend to maintain their level of extremism within the community, while still remaining distinguishable from the general online discourse. Our findings contribute to the study of extremism by introducing a more holistic, cross-ideological approach that transcends traditional, trait-specific models.

Explaining GPT-4's Schema of Depression Using Machine Behavior Analysis

Use of large language models such as ChatGPT (GPT-4) for mental health support has grown rapidly, emerging as a promising route to assess and help people with mood disorders, like depression. However, we have a limited understanding of GPT-4's schema of mental disorders, that is, how it internally associates and interprets symptoms. In this work, we leveraged contemporary measurement theory to decode how GPT-4 interrelates depressive symptoms to inform both clinical utility and theoretical understanding. We found GPT-4's assessment of depression: (a) had high overall convergent validity (r = .71 with self-report on 955 samples, and r = .81 with experts judgments on 209 samples); (b) had moderately high internal consistency (symptom inter-correlates r = .23 to .78 ) that largely aligned with literature and self-report; except that GPT-4 (c) underemphasized suicidality's -- and overemphasized psychomotor's -- relationship with other symptoms, and (d) had symptom inference patterns that suggest nuanced hypotheses (e.g. sleep and fatigue are influenced by most other symptoms while feelings of worthlessness/guilt is mostly influenced by depressed mood).