Thus Spake Long-Context Large Language Model

Long context is an important topic in Natural Language Processing (NLP), running through the development of NLP architectures, and offers immense opportunities for Large Language Models (LLMs) giving LLMs the lifelong learning potential akin to humans. Unfortunately, the pursuit of a long context is accompanied by numerous obstacles. Nevertheless, long context remains a core competitive advantage for LLMs. In the past two years, the context length of LLMs has achieved a breakthrough extension to millions of tokens. Moreover, the research on long-context LLMs has expanded from length extrapolation to a comprehensive focus on architecture, infrastructure, training, and evaluation technologies. Inspired by the symphonic poem, Thus Spake Zarathustra, we draw an analogy between the journey of extending the context of LLM and the attempts of humans to transcend its mortality. In this survey, We will illustrate how LLM struggles between the tremendous need for a longer context and its equal need to accept the fact that it is ultimately finite. To achieve this, we give a global picture of the lifecycle of long-context LLMs from four perspectives: architecture, infrastructure, training, and evaluation, showcasing the full spectrum of long-context technologies. At the end of this survey, we will present 10 unanswered questions currently faced by long-context LLMs. We hope this survey can serve as a systematic introduction to the research on long-context LLMs.

LongSafetyBench: Long-Context LLMs Struggle with Safety Issues

With the development of large language models (LLMs), the sequence length of these models continues to increase, drawing significant attention to long-context language models. However, the evaluation of these models has been primarily limited to their capabilities, with a lack of research focusing on their safety. Existing work, such as ManyShotJailbreak, has to some extent demonstrated that long-context language models can exhibit safety concerns. However, the methods used are limited and lack comprehensiveness. In response, we introduce \textbf{LongSafetyBench}, the first benchmark designed to objectively and comprehensively evaluate the safety of long-context models. LongSafetyBench consists of 10 task categories, with an average length of 41,889 words. After testing eight long-context language models on LongSafetyBench, we found that existing models generally exhibit insufficient safety capabilities. The proportion of safe responses from most mainstream long-context LLMs is below 50\%. Moreover, models' safety performance in long-context scenarios does not always align with that in short-context scenarios. Further investigation revealed that long-context models tend to overlook harmful content within lengthy texts. We also proposed a simple yet effective solution, allowing open-source models to achieve performance comparable to that of top-tier closed-source models. We believe that LongSafetyBench can serve as a valuable benchmark for evaluating the safety capabilities of long-context language models. We hope that our work will encourage the broader community to pay attention to the safety of long-context models and contribute to the development of solutions to improve the safety of long-context LLMs.

MetaAlign: Align Large Language Models with Diverse Preferences during Inference Time

Large Language Models (LLMs) acquire extensive knowledge and remarkable abilities from extensive text corpora, making them powerful tools for various applications. To make LLMs more usable, aligning them with human preferences is essential. Existing alignment techniques, such as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), typically embed predefined preferences directly within the model's parameters. These methods, however, often result in a static alignment that can not account for the diversity of human preferences in practical applications. In response to this challenge, we propose an effective method, \textbf{MetaAlign}, which aims to help LLMs dynamically align with various explicit or implicit preferences specified at inference time. Experimental results show that LLMs optimized on our meticulously constructed MetaAlign Dataset can effectively align with any preferences specified at the inference stage, validating the feasibility of MetaAlign. We hope that our work can provide some insights into the alignment of language models.

Calibrating the Confidence of Large Language Models by Eliciting Fidelity

Large language models optimized with techniques like RLHF have achieved good alignment in being helpful and harmless. However, post-alignment, these language models often exhibit overconfidence, where the expressed confidence does not accurately calibrate with their correctness rate. In this paper, we decompose the language model confidence into the \textit{Uncertainty} about the question and the \textit{Fidelity} to the answer generated by language models. Then, we propose a plug-and-play method to estimate the confidence of language models. Our method has shown good calibration performance by conducting experiments with 6 RLHF-LMs on four MCQA datasets. Moreover, we propose two novel metrics, IPR and CE, to evaluate the calibration of the model, and we have conducted a detailed discussion on \textit{Truly Well-Calibrated Confidence}. Our method could serve as a strong baseline, and we hope that this work will provide some insights into the model confidence calibration.

Evaluating Hallucinations in Chinese Large Language Models

In this paper, we establish a benchmark named HalluQA (Chinese Hallucination Question-Answering) to measure the hallucination phenomenon in Chinese large language models. HalluQA contains 450 meticulously designed adversarial questions, spanning multiple domains, and takes into account Chinese historical culture, customs, and social phenomena. During the construction of HalluQA, we consider two types of hallucinations: imitative falsehoods and factual errors, and we construct adversarial samples based on GLM-130B and ChatGPT. For evaluation, we design an automated evaluation method using GPT-4 to judge whether a model output is hallucinated. We conduct extensive experiments on 24 large language models, including ERNIE-Bot, Baichuan2, ChatGLM, Qwen, SparkDesk and etc. Out of the 24 models, 18 achieved non-hallucination rates lower than 50%. This indicates that HalluQA is highly challenging. We analyze the primary types of hallucinations in different types of models and their causes. Additionally, we discuss which types of hallucinations should be prioritized for different types of models.