Could ChatGPT get an Engineering Degree? Evaluating Higher Education Vulnerability to AI Assistants

AI assistants are being increasingly used by students enrolled in higher education institutions. While these tools provide opportunities for improved teaching and education, they also pose significant challenges for assessment and learning outcomes. We conceptualize these challenges through the lens of vulnerability, the potential for university assessments and learning outcomes to be impacted by student use of generative AI. We investigate the potential scale of this vulnerability by measuring the degree to which AI assistants can complete assessment questions in standard university-level STEM courses. Specifically, we compile a novel dataset of textual assessment questions from 50 courses at EPFL and evaluate whether two AI assistants, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 can adequately answer these questions. We use eight prompting strategies to produce responses and find that GPT-4 answers an average of 65.8% of questions correctly, and can even produce the correct answer across at least one prompting strategy for 85.1% of questions. When grouping courses in our dataset by degree program, these systems already pass non-project assessments of large numbers of core courses in various degree programs, posing risks to higher education accreditation that will be amplified as these models improve. Our results call for revising program-level assessment design in higher education in light of advances in generative AI.

Course Recommender Systems Need to Consider the Job Market

Current course recommender systems primarily leverage learner-course interactions, course content, learner preferences, and supplementary course details like instructor, institution, ratings, and reviews, to make their recommendation. However, these systems often overlook a critical aspect: the evolving skill demand of the job market. This paper focuses on the perspective of academic researchers, working in collaboration with the industry, aiming to develop a course recommender system that incorporates job market skill demands. In light of the job market's rapid changes and the current state of research in course recommender systems, we outline essential properties for course recommender systems to address these demands effectively, including explainable, sequential, unsupervised, and aligned with the job market and user's goals. Our discussion extends to the challenges and research questions this objective entails, including unsupervised skill extraction from job listings, course descriptions, and resumes, as well as predicting recommendations that align with learner objectives and the job market and designing metrics to evaluate this alignment. Furthermore, we introduce an initial system that addresses some existing limitations of course recommender systems using large Language Models (LLMs) for skill extraction and Reinforcement Learning (RL) for alignment with the job market. We provide empirical results using open-source data to demonstrate its effectiveness.

Multi-Task Learning for Features Extraction in Financial Annual Reports

For assessing various performance indicators of companies, the focus is shifting from strictly financial (quantitative) publicly disclosed information to qualitative (textual) information. This textual data can provide valuable weak signals, for example through stylistic features, which can complement the quantitative data on financial performance or on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) criteria. In this work, we use various multi-task learning methods for financial text classification with the focus on financial sentiment, objectivity, forward-looking sentence prediction and ESG-content detection. We propose different methods to combine the information extracted from training jointly on different tasks; our best-performing method highlights the positive effect of explicitly adding auxiliary task predictions as features for the final target task during the multi-task training. Next, we use these classifiers to extract textual features from annual reports of FTSE350 companies and investigate the link between ESG quantitative scores and these features.

ConGeo: Robust Cross-view Geo-localization across Ground View Variations

Cross-view geo-localization aims at localizing a ground-level query image by matching it to its corresponding geo-referenced aerial view. In real-world scenarios, the task requires accommodating diverse ground images captured by users with varying orientations and reduced field of views (FoVs). However, existing learning pipelines are orientation-specific or FoV-specific, demanding separate model training for different ground view variations. Such models heavily depend on the North-aligned spatial correspondence and predefined FoVs in the training data, compromising their robustness across different settings. To tackle this challenge, we propose ConGeo, a single- and cross-modal Contrastive method for Geo-localization: it enhances robustness and consistency in feature representations to improve a model's invariance to orientation and its resilience to FoV variations, by enforcing proximity between ground view variations of the same location. As a generic learning objective for cross-view geo-localization, when integrated into state-of-the-art pipelines, ConGeo significantly boosts the performance of three base models on four geo-localization benchmarks for diverse ground view variations and outperforms competing methods that train separate models for each ground view variation.

"Flex Tape Can't Fix That": Bias and Misinformation in Edited Language Models

Model editing has emerged as a cost-effective strategy to update knowledge stored in language models. However, model editing can have unintended consequences after edits are applied: information unrelated to the edits can also be changed, and other general behaviors of the model can be wrongly altered. In this work, we investigate how model editing methods unexpectedly amplify model biases post-edit. We introduce a novel benchmark dataset, Seesaw-CF, for measuring bias-related harms of model editing and conduct the first in-depth investigation of how different weight-editing methods impact model bias. Specifically, we focus on biases with respect to demographic attributes such as race, geographic origin, and gender, as well as qualitative flaws in long-form texts generated by edited language models. We find that edited models exhibit, to various degrees, more biased behavior as they become less confident in attributes for Asian, African, and South American subjects. Furthermore, edited models amplify sexism and xenophobia in text generations while remaining seemingly coherent and logical. Finally, editing facts about place of birth, country of citizenship, or gender have particularly negative effects on the model's knowledge about unrelated features like field of work.

ConVQG: Contrastive Visual Question Generation with Multimodal Guidance

Asking questions about visual environments is a crucial way for intelligent agents to understand rich multi-faceted scenes, raising the importance of Visual Question Generation (VQG) systems. Apart from being grounded to the image, existing VQG systems can use textual constraints, such as expected answers or knowledge triplets, to generate focused questions. These constraints allow VQG systems to specify the question content or leverage external commonsense knowledge that can not be obtained from the image content only. However, generating focused questions using textual constraints while enforcing a high relevance to the image content remains a challenge, as VQG systems often ignore one or both forms of grounding. In this work, we propose Contrastive Visual Question Generation (ConVQG), a method using a dual contrastive objective to discriminate questions generated using both modalities from those based on a single one. Experiments on both knowledge-aware and standard VQG benchmarks demonstrate that ConVQG outperforms the state-of-the-art methods and generates image-grounded, text-guided, and knowledge-rich questions. Our human evaluation results also show preference for ConVQG questions compared to non-contrastive baselines.

Rethinking Skill Extraction in the Job Market Domain using Large Language Models

Skill Extraction involves identifying skills and qualifications mentioned in documents such as job postings and resumes. The task is commonly tackled by training supervised models using a sequence labeling approach with BIO tags. However, the reliance on manually annotated data limits the generalizability of such approaches. Moreover, the common BIO setting limits the ability of the models to capture complex skill patterns and handle ambiguous mentions. In this paper, we explore the use of in-context learning to overcome these challenges, on a benchmark of 6 uniformized skill extraction datasets. Our approach leverages the few-shot learning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) to identify and extract skills from sentences. We show that LLMs, despite not being on par with traditional supervised models in terms of performance, can better handle syntactically complex skill mentions in skill extraction tasks.

JOBSKAPE: A Framework for Generating Synthetic Job Postings to Enhance Skill Matching

Recent approaches in skill matching, employing synthetic training data for classification or similarity model training, have shown promising results, reducing the need for time-consuming and expensive annotations. However, previous synthetic datasets have limitations, such as featuring only one skill per sentence and generally comprising short sentences. In this paper, we introduce JobSkape, a framework to generate synthetic data that tackles these limitations, specifically designed to enhance skill-to-taxonomy matching. Within this framework, we create SkillSkape, a comprehensive open-source synthetic dataset of job postings tailored for skill-matching tasks. We introduce several offline metrics that show that our dataset resembles real-world data. Additionally, we present a multi-step pipeline for skill extraction and matching tasks using large language models (LLMs), benchmarking against known supervised methodologies. We outline that the downstream evaluation results on real-world data can beat baselines, underscoring its efficacy and adaptability.

Instruction-tuning Aligns LLMs to the Human Brain

Instruction-tuning is a widely adopted method of finetuning that enables large language models (LLMs) to generate output that more closely resembles human responses to natural language queries, in many cases leading to human-level performance on diverse testbeds. However, it remains unclear whether instruction-tuning truly makes LLMs more similar to how humans process language. We investigate the effect of instruction-tuning on LLM-human similarity in two ways: (1) brain alignment, the similarity of LLM internal representations to neural activity in the human language system, and (2) behavioral alignment, the similarity of LLM and human behavior on a reading task. We assess 25 vanilla and instruction-tuned LLMs across three datasets involving humans reading naturalistic stories and sentences. We discover that instruction-tuning generally enhances brain alignment by an average of 6%, but does not have a similar effect on behavioral alignment. To identify the factors underlying LLM-brain alignment, we compute correlations between the brain alignment of LLMs and various model properties, such as model size, various problem-solving abilities, and performance on tasks requiring world knowledge spanning various domains. Notably, we find a strong positive correlation between brain alignment and model size (r = 0.95), as well as performance on tasks requiring world knowledge (r = 0.81). Our results demonstrate that instruction-tuning LLMs improves both world knowledge representations and brain alignment, suggesting that mechanisms that encode world knowledge in LLMs also improve representational alignment to the human brain.

MEDITRON-70B: Scaling Medical Pretraining for Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) can potentially democratize access to medical knowledge. While many efforts have been made to harness and improve LLMs' medical knowledge and reasoning capacities, the resulting models are either closed-source (e.g., PaLM, GPT-4) or limited in scale (<= 13B parameters), which restricts their abilities. In this work, we improve access to large-scale medical LLMs by releasing MEDITRON: a suite of open-source LLMs with 7B and 70B parameters adapted to the medical domain. MEDITRON builds on Llama-2 (through our adaptation of Nvidia's Megatron-LM distributed trainer), and extends pretraining on a comprehensively curated medical corpus, including selected PubMed articles, abstracts, and internationally-recognized medical guidelines. Evaluations using four major medical benchmarks show significant performance gains over several state-of-the-art baselines before and after task-specific finetuning. Overall, MEDITRON achieves a 6% absolute performance gain over the best public baseline in its parameter class and 3% over the strongest baseline we finetuned from Llama-2. Compared to closed-source LLMs, MEDITRON-70B outperforms GPT-3.5 and Med-PaLM and is within 5% of GPT-4 and 10% of Med-PaLM-2. We release our code for curating the medical pretraining corpus and the MEDITRON model weights to drive open-source development of more capable medical LLMs.