The Roles of English in Evaluating Multilingual Language Models

Multilingual natural language processing is getting increased attention, with numerous models, benchmarks, and methods being released for many languages. English is often used in multilingual evaluation to prompt language models (LMs), mainly to overcome the lack of instruction tuning data in other languages. In this position paper, we lay out two roles of English in multilingual LM evaluations: as an interface and as a natural language. We argue that these roles have different goals: task performance versus language understanding. This discrepancy is highlighted with examples from datasets and evaluation setups. Numerous works explicitly use English as an interface to boost task performance. We recommend to move away from this imprecise method and instead focus on furthering language understanding.

How Good is Your Wikipedia?

Wikipedia's perceived high quality and broad language coverage have established it as a fundamental resource in multilingual NLP. In the context of low-resource languages, however, these quality assumptions are increasingly being scrutinised. This paper critically examines the data quality of Wikipedia in a non-English setting by subjecting it to various quality filtering techniques, revealing widespread issues such as a high percentage of one-line articles and duplicate articles. We evaluate the downstream impact of quality filtering on Wikipedia and find that data quality pruning is an effective means for resource-efficient training without hurting performance, especially for low-resource languages. Moreover, we advocate for a shift in perspective from seeking a general definition of data quality towards a more language- and task-specific one. Ultimately, we aim for this study to serve as a guide to using Wikipedia for pretraining in a multilingual setting.

A Principled Framework for Evaluating on Typologically Diverse Languages

Beyond individual languages, multilingual natural language processing (NLP) research increasingly aims to develop models that perform well across languages generally. However, evaluating these systems on all the world's languages is practically infeasible. To attain generalizability, representative language sampling is essential. Previous work argues that generalizable multilingual evaluation sets should contain languages with diverse typological properties. However, 'typologically diverse' language samples have been found to vary considerably in this regard, and popular sampling methods are flawed and inconsistent. We present a language sampling framework for selecting highly typologically diverse languages given a sampling frame, informed by language typology. We compare sampling methods with a range of metrics and find that our systematic methods consistently retrieve more typologically diverse language selections than previous methods in NLP. Moreover, we provide evidence that this affects generalizability in multilingual model evaluation, emphasizing the importance of diverse language sampling in NLP evaluation.

Engineering Conversational Search Systems: A Review of Applications, Architectures, and Functional Components

Conversational search systems enable information retrieval via natural language interactions, with the goal of maximizing users' information gain over multiple dialogue turns. The increasing prevalence of conversational interfaces adopting this search paradigm challenges traditional information retrieval approaches, stressing the importance of better understanding the engineering process of developing these systems. We undertook a systematic literature review to investigate the links between theoretical studies and technical implementations of conversational search systems. Our review identifies real-world application scenarios, system architectures, and functional components. We consolidate our results by presenting a layered architecture framework and explaining the core functions of conversational search systems. Furthermore, we reflect on our findings in light of the rapid progress in large language models, discussing their capabilities, limitations, and directions for future research.

What is 'Typological Diversity' in NLP?

The NLP research community has devoted increased attention to languages beyond English, resulting in considerable improvements for multilingual NLP. However, these improvements only apply to a small subset of the world's languages. Aiming to extend this, an increasing number of papers aspires to enhance generalizable multilingual performance across languages. To this end, linguistic typology is commonly used to motivate language selection, on the basis that a broad typological sample ought to imply generalization across a broad range of languages. These selections are often described as being 'typologically diverse'. In this work, we systematically investigate NLP research that includes claims regarding 'typological diversity'. We find there are no set definitions or criteria for such claims. We introduce metrics to approximate the diversity of language selection along several axes and find that the results vary considerably across papers. Crucially, we show that skewed language selection can lead to overestimated multilingual performance. We recommend future work to include an operationalization of 'typological diversity' that empirically justifies the diversity of language samples.

Detecting ChatGPT: A Survey of the State of Detecting ChatGPT-Generated Text

While recent advancements in the capabilities and widespread accessibility of generative language models, such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2022), have brought about various benefits by generating fluent human-like text, the task of distinguishing between human- and large language model (LLM) generated text has emerged as a crucial problem. These models can potentially deceive by generating artificial text that appears to be human-generated. This issue is particularly significant in domains such as law, education, and science, where ensuring the integrity of text is of the utmost importance. This survey provides an overview of the current approaches employed to differentiate between texts generated by humans and ChatGPT. We present an account of the different datasets constructed for detecting ChatGPT-generated text, the various methods utilized, what qualitative analyses into the characteristics of human versus ChatGPT-generated text have been performed, and finally, summarize our findings into general insights