Verbosity $ eq$ Veracity: Demystify Verbosity Compensation Behavior of Large Language Models

When unsure about an answer, humans often respond with more words than necessary, hoping that part of the response will be correct. We observe a similar behavior in large language models (LLMs), which we term "Verbosity Compensation" (VC). VC is harmful because it confuses the user understanding, leading to low efficiency, and influences the LLM services by increasing the latency and cost of generating useless tokens. In this paper, we present the first work that defines and analyzes Verbosity Compensation, explores its causes, and proposes a simple mitigating approach. We define Verbosity Compensation as the behavior of generating responses that can be compressed without information loss when prompted to write concisely. Our experiments, conducted on five datasets of knowledge and reasoning-based QA tasks with 14 newly developed LLMs, reveal three conclusions. 1) We reveal a pervasive presence of verbosity compensation across all models and all datasets. Notably, GPT-4 exhibits a VC frequency of 50.40%. 2) We reveal the large performance gap between verbose and concise responses, with a notable difference of 27.61% on the Qasper dataset. We also demonstrate that this difference does not naturally diminish as LLM capability increases. Both 1) and 2) highlight the urgent need to mitigate the frequency of VC behavior and disentangle verbosity with veracity. We propose a simple yet effective cascade algorithm that replaces the verbose responses with the other model-generated responses. The results show that our approach effectively alleviates the VC of the Mistral model from 63.81% to 16.16% on the Qasper dataset. 3) We also find that verbose responses exhibit higher uncertainty across all five datasets, suggesting a strong connection between verbosity and model uncertainty. Our dataset and code are available at https://github.com/psunlpgroup/VerbosityLLM.

AAAR-1.0: Assessing AI's Potential to Assist Research

Numerous studies have assessed the proficiency of AI systems, particularly large language models (LLMs), in facilitating everyday tasks such as email writing, question answering, and creative content generation. However, researchers face unique challenges and opportunities in leveraging LLMs for their own work, such as brainstorming research ideas, designing experiments, and writing or reviewing papers. In this study, we introduce AAAR-1.0, a benchmark dataset designed to evaluate LLM performance in three fundamental, expertise-intensive research tasks: (i) EquationInference, assessing the correctness of equations based on the contextual information in paper submissions; (ii) ExperimentDesign, designing experiments to validate research ideas and solutions; (iii) PaperWeakness, identifying weaknesses in paper submissions; and (iv) REVIEWCRITIQUE, identifying each segment in human reviews is deficient or not. AAAR-1.0 differs from prior benchmarks in two key ways: first, it is explicitly research-oriented, with tasks requiring deep domain expertise; second, it is researcher-oriented, mirroring the primary activities that researchers engage in on a daily basis. An evaluation of both open-source and proprietary LLMs reveals their potential as well as limitations in conducting sophisticated research tasks. We will keep iterating AAAR-1.0 to new versions.

Chain-of-Scrutiny: Detecting Backdoor Attacks for Large Language Models

Backdoor attacks present significant threats to Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly with the rise of third-party services that offer API integration and prompt engineering. Untrustworthy third parties can plant backdoors into LLMs and pose risks to users by embedding malicious instructions into user queries. The backdoor-compromised LLM will generate malicious output when and input is embedded with a specific trigger predetermined by an attacker. Traditional defense strategies, which primarily involve model parameter fine-tuning and gradient calculation, are inadequate for LLMs due to their extensive computational and clean data requirements. In this paper, we propose a novel solution, Chain-of-Scrutiny (CoS), to address these challenges. Backdoor attacks fundamentally create a shortcut from the trigger to the target output, thus lack reasoning support. Accordingly, CoS guides the LLMs to generate detailed reasoning steps for the input, then scrutinizes the reasoning process to ensure consistency with the final answer. Any inconsistency may indicate an attack. CoS only requires black-box access to LLM, offering a practical defense, particularly for API-accessible LLMs. It is user-friendly, enabling users to conduct the defense themselves. Driven by natural language, the entire defense process is transparent to users. We validate the effectiveness of CoS through extensive experiments across various tasks and LLMs. Additionally, experiments results shows CoS proves more beneficial for more powerful LLMs.

Chain of Agents: Large Language Models Collaborating on Long-Context Tasks

Addressing the challenge of effectively processing long contexts has become a critical issue for Large Language Models (LLMs). Two common strategies have emerged: 1) reducing the input length, such as retrieving relevant chunks by Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), and 2) expanding the context window limit of LLMs. However, both strategies have drawbacks: input reduction has no guarantee of covering the part with needed information, while window extension struggles with focusing on the pertinent information for solving the task. To mitigate these limitations, we propose Chain-of-Agents (CoA), a novel framework that harnesses multi-agent collaboration through natural language to enable information aggregation and context reasoning across various LLMs over long-context tasks. CoA consists of multiple worker agents who sequentially communicate to handle different segmented portions of the text, followed by a manager agent who synthesizes these contributions into a coherent final output. CoA processes the entire input by interleaving reading and reasoning, and it mitigates long context focus issues by assigning each agent a short context. We perform comprehensive evaluation of CoA on a wide range of long-context tasks in question answering, summarization, and code completion, demonstrating significant improvements by up to 10% over strong baselines of RAG, Full-Context, and multi-agent LLMs.

When Can LLMs Actually Correct Their Own Mistakes? A Critical Survey of Self-Correction of LLMs

Self-correction is an approach to improving responses from large language models (LLMs) by refining the responses using LLMs during inference. Prior work has proposed various self-correction frameworks using different sources of feedback, including self-evaluation and external feedback. However, there is still no consensus on the question of when LLMs can correct their own mistakes, as recent studies also report negative results. In this work, we critically survey broad papers and discuss the conditions required for successful self-correction. We first find that prior studies often do not define their research questions in detail and involve impractical frameworks or unfair evaluations that over-evaluate self-correction. To tackle these issues, we categorize research questions in self-correction research and provide a checklist for designing appropriate experiments. Our critical survey based on the newly categorized research questions shows that (1) no prior work demonstrates successful self-correction with feedback from prompted LLMs in general tasks, (2) self-correction works well in tasks that can use reliable external feedback, and (3) large-scale fine-tuning enables self-correction.

Evaluating LLMs at Detecting Errors in LLM Responses

With Large Language Models (LLMs) being widely used across various tasks, detecting errors in their responses is increasingly crucial. However, little research has been conducted on error detection of LLM responses. Collecting error annotations on LLM responses is challenging due to the subjective nature of many NLP tasks, and thus previous research focuses on tasks of little practical value (e.g., word sorting) or limited error types (e.g., faithfulness in summarization). This work introduces ReaLMistake, the first error detection benchmark consisting of objective, realistic, and diverse errors made by LLMs. ReaLMistake contains three challenging and meaningful tasks that introduce objectively assessable errors in four categories (reasoning correctness, instruction-following, context-faithfulness, and parameterized knowledge), eliciting naturally observed and diverse errors in responses of GPT-4 and Llama 2 70B annotated by experts. We use ReaLMistake to evaluate error detectors based on 12 LLMs. Our findings show: 1) Top LLMs like GPT-4 and Claude 3 detect errors made by LLMs at very low recall, and all LLM-based error detectors perform much worse than humans. 2) Explanations by LLM-based error detectors lack reliability. 3) LLMs-based error detection is sensitive to small changes in prompts but remains challenging to improve. 4) Popular approaches to improving LLMs, including self-consistency and majority vote, do not improve the error detection performance. Our benchmark and code are provided at https://github.com/psunlpgroup/ReaLMistake.

A General Benchmark Framework is Dynamic Graph Neural Network Need

Dynamic graph learning is crucial for modeling real-world systems with evolving relationships and temporal dynamics. However, the lack of a unified benchmark framework in current research has led to inaccurate evaluations of dynamic graph models. This paper highlights the significance of dynamic graph learning and its applications in various domains. It emphasizes the need for a standardized benchmark framework that captures temporal dynamics, evolving graph structures, and downstream task requirements. Establishing a unified benchmark will help researchers understand the strengths and limitations of existing models, foster innovation, and advance dynamic graph learning. In conclusion, this paper identifies the lack of a standardized benchmark framework as a current limitation in dynamic graph learning research . Such a framework will facilitate accurate model evaluation, drive advancements in dynamic graph learning techniques, and enable the development of more effective models for real-world applications.

Fair Abstractive Summarization of Diverse Perspectives

People from different social and demographic groups express diverse perspectives and conflicting opinions on a broad set of topics such as product reviews, healthcare, law, and politics. A fair summary should provide a comprehensive coverage of diverse perspectives without underrepresenting certain groups. However, current work in summarization metrics and Large Language Models (LLMs) evaluation has not explored fair abstractive summarization. In this paper, we systematically investigate fair abstractive summarization for user-generated data. We first formally define fairness in abstractive summarization as not underrepresenting perspectives of any groups of people and propose four reference-free automatic metrics measuring the differences between target and source perspectives. We evaluate five LLMs, including three GPT models, Alpaca, and Claude, on six datasets collected from social media, online reviews, and recorded transcripts. Experiments show that both the model-generated and the human-written reference summaries suffer from low fairness. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of the common factors influencing fairness and propose three simple but effective methods to alleviate unfair summarization. Our dataset and code are available at https://github.com/psunlpgroup/FairSumm.

FaMeSumm: Investigating and Improving Faithfulness of Medical Summarization

Summaries of medical text shall be faithful by being consistent and factual with source inputs, which is an important but understudied topic for safety and efficiency in healthcare. In this paper, we investigate and improve faithfulness in summarization on a broad range of medical summarization tasks. Our investigation reveals that current summarization models often produce unfaithful outputs for medical input text. We then introduce FaMeSumm, a framework to improve faithfulness by fine-tuning pre-trained language models based on medical knowledge. FaMeSumm performs contrastive learning on designed sets of faithful and unfaithful summaries, and it incorporates medical terms and their contexts to encourage faithful generation of medical terms. We conduct comprehensive experiments on three datasets in two languages: health question and radiology report summarization datasets in English, and a patient-doctor dialogue dataset in Chinese. Results demonstrate that FaMeSumm is flexible and effective by delivering consistent improvements over mainstream language models such as BART, T5, mT5, and PEGASUS, yielding state-of-the-art performances on metrics for faithfulness and general quality. Human evaluation by doctors also shows that FaMeSumm generates more faithful outputs. Our code is available at https://github.com/psunlpgroup/FaMeSumm .

XSemPLR: Cross-Lingual Semantic Parsing in Multiple Natural Languages and Meaning Representations

Cross-Lingual Semantic Parsing (CLSP) aims to translate queries in multiple natural languages (NLs) into meaning representations (MRs) such as SQL, lambda calculus, and logic forms. However, existing CLSP models are separately proposed and evaluated on datasets of limited tasks and applications, impeding a comprehensive and unified evaluation of CLSP on a diverse range of NLs and MRs. To this end, we present XSemPLR, a unified benchmark for cross-lingual semantic parsing featured with 22 natural languages and 8 meaning representations by examining and selecting 9 existing datasets to cover 5 tasks and 164 domains. We use XSemPLR to conduct a comprehensive benchmark study on a wide range of multilingual language models including encoder-based models (mBERT, XLM-R), encoder-decoder models (mBART, mT5), and decoder-based models (Codex, BLOOM). We design 6 experiment settings covering various lingual combinations (monolingual, multilingual, cross-lingual) and numbers of learning samples (full dataset, few-shot, and zero-shot). Our experiments show that encoder-decoder models (mT5) achieve the highest performance compared with other popular models, and multilingual training can further improve the average performance. Notably, multilingual large language models (e.g., BLOOM) are still inadequate to perform CLSP tasks. We also find that the performance gap between monolingual training and cross-lingual transfer learning is still significant for multilingual models, though it can be mitigated by cross-lingual few-shot training. Our dataset and code are available at https://github.com/psunlpgroup/XSemPLR.