Homo Sapiens, "wise human" in Latin, is the taxonomic species name for modern humans. But observing the current state of the world and its trajectory, it is hard for me to accept the description "wise." I am not the first to object to the "sapiens" descriptor. The French philosopher Henri-Louis Bergson argued in 1911 that a better term would be Homo Faber, referring to human tool-making ability. This ability goes back to early humans, about three million years ago. Most importantly, human tools got better and better due to innovation and cultural transmission.

Understanding how individuals perceive and recall information in their natural environments is critical to understanding potential failures in perception (e.g., sensory loss) and memory (e.g., dementia). Event segmentation, the process of identifying distinct events within dynamic environments, is central to how we perceive, encode, and recall experiences. This cognitive process not only influences moment-to-moment comprehension but also shapes event specific memory. Despite the importance of event segmentation and event memory, current research methodologies rely heavily on human judgements for assessing segmentation patterns and recall ability, which are subjective and time-consuming. A few approaches have been introduced to automate event segmentation and recall scoring, but validity with human responses and ease of implementation require further advancements. To address these concerns, we leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate event segmentation and assess recall, employing chat completion and text-embedding models, respectively. We validated these models against human annotations and determined that LLMs can accurately identify event boundaries, and that human event segmentation is more consistent with LLMs than among humans themselves. Using this framework, we advanced an automated approach for recall assessments which revealed semantic similarity between segmented narrative events and participant recall can estimate recall performance. Our findings demonstrate that LLMs can effectively simulate human segmentation patterns and provide recall evaluations that are a scalable alternative to manual scoring. This research opens novel avenues for studying the intersection between perception, memory, and cognitive impairment using methodologies driven by artificial intelligence.

Investigating value alignment in Large Language Models (LLMs) based on cultural context has become a critical area of research. However, similar biases have not been extensively explored in large vision-language models (VLMs). As the scale of multimodal models continues to grow, it becomes increasingly important to assess whether images can serve as reliable proxies for culture and how these values are embedded through the integration of both visual and textual data. In this paper, we conduct a thorough evaluation of multimodal model at different scales, focusing on their alignment with cultural values. Our findings reveal that, much like LLMs, VLMs exhibit sensitivity to cultural values, but their performance in aligning with these values is highly context-dependent. While VLMs show potential in improving value understanding through the use of images, this alignment varies significantly across contexts highlighting the complexities and underexplored challenges in the alignment of multimodal models.

Throughout this project, we have attempted to develop an automatic evaluator that determines whether Basque language compositions meet the C1 level. To achieve our goal, we obtained 10,000 transcribed compositions through an agreement between HABE and HiTZ to train our system. We have developed different techniques to avoid data scarcity and system overfitting: EDA, SCL and regulation; We have also conducted tests with different Language Models to analyze their behavior. Finally, we have also performed analyses of different system behaviors to measure model calibration and the impact of artifacts. -- Proiektu honetan zehar euskarazko idazlanek C1 maila duten edo ez zehazten duen ebaluatzaile automatiko bat garatzen saiatu gara. Gure helburua betetzeko HABE eta HiTZ arteko hitzarmenaren bitartez 10.000 transkribatutako idazlan eskuratu ditugu gure sistema entrenatzeko. Datu eskasia eta sistemaren gaindoitzea ekiditeko teknika ezberdinak landu ditugu: EDA, SCL eta erregulazioa; Hizkuntza Eredu ezberdinekin ere probak egin ditugu duten portaera aztertzeko. Azkenik, sistema ezberdinen portaeren analisiak ere egin ditugu, ereduen kalibrazioa eta artefaktuen eragina neurtzeko.

Providing evaluations to student work is a critical component of effective student learning, and automating its process can significantly reduce the workload on human graders. Automatic Short Answer Grading (ASAG) systems, enabled by advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs), offer a promising solution for assessing and providing instant feedback for open-ended student responses. In this paper, we present an ASAG pipeline leveraging state-of-the-art LLMs. Our new LLM-based ASAG pipeline achieves better performances than existing custom-built models on the same datasets. We also compare the grading performance of three OpenAI models: GPT-4, GPT-4o, and o1-preview. Our results demonstrate that GPT-4o achieves the best balance between accuracy and cost-effectiveness. On the other hand, o1-preview, despite higher accuracy, exhibits a larger variance in error that makes it less practical for classroom use. We investigate the effects of incorporating instructor-graded examples into prompts using no examples, random selection, and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)-based selection strategies. Our findings indicate that providing graded examples enhances grading accuracy, with RAG-based selection outperforming random selection. Additionally, integrating grading rubrics improves accuracy by offering a structured standard for evaluation.

Should LLMs generate language that makes them seem human? Human-like language might improve user experience, but might also lead to overreliance and stereotyping. Assessing these potential impacts requires a systematic way to measure human-like tone in LLM outputs. We introduce HumT and SocioT, metrics for human-like tone and other dimensions of social perceptions in text data based on relative probabilities from an LLM. By measuring HumT across preference and usage datasets, we find that users prefer less human-like outputs from LLMs. HumT also offers insights into the impacts of anthropomorphism: human-like LLM outputs are highly correlated with warmth, social closeness, femininity, and low status, which are closely linked to the aforementioned harms. We introduce DumT, a method using HumT to systematically control and reduce the degree of human-like tone while preserving model performance. DumT offers a practical approach for mitigating risks associated with anthropomorphic language generation.

In an era of increasingly capable foundation models, job seekers are turning to generative AI tools to enhance their application materials. However, unequal access to and knowledge about generative AI tools can harm both employers and candidates by reducing the accuracy of hiring decisions and giving some candidates an unfair advantage. To address these challenges, we introduce a new variant of the strategic classification framework tailored to manipulations performed using large language models, accommodating varying levels of manipulations and stochastic outcomes. We propose a ``two-ticket'' scheme, where the hiring algorithm applies an additional manipulation to each submitted resume and considers this manipulated version together with the original submitted resume. We establish theoretical guarantees for this scheme, showing improvements for both the fairness and accuracy of hiring decisions when the true positive rate is maximized subject to a no false positives constraint. We further generalize this approach to an $n$-ticket scheme and prove that hiring outcomes converge to a fixed, group-independent decision, eliminating disparities arising from differential LLM access. Finally, we empirically validate our framework and the performance of our two-ticket scheme on real resumes using an open-source resume screening tool.

We explore how private synthetic text can be generated by suitably prompting a large language model (LLM). This addresses a challenge for organizations like hospitals, which hold sensitive text data like patient medical records, and wish to share it in order to train machine learning models for medical tasks, while preserving patient privacy. Methods that rely on training or finetuning a model may be out of reach, either due to API limits of third-party LLMs, or due to ethical and legal prohibitions on sharing the private data with the LLM itself. We propose Differentially Private Keyphrase Prompt Seeding (DP-KPS), a method that generates a private synthetic text corpus from a sensitive input corpus, by accessing an LLM only through privatized prompts. It is based on seeding the prompts with private samples from a distribution over phrase embeddings, thus capturing the input corpus while achieving requisite output diversity and maintaining differential privacy. We evaluate DP-KPS on downstream ML text classification tasks, and show that the corpora it generates preserve much of the predictive power of the original ones. Our findings offer hope that institutions can reap ML insights by privately sharing data with simple prompts and little compute.

Large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced human language understanding and generation, with pretraining data quality and organization being crucial to their performance. Multi-stage pretraining is a promising approach, but existing methods often lack quantitative criteria for data partitioning and instead rely on intuitive heuristics. In this paper, we propose the novel Four-quadRAnt Multi-stage prEtraining strategy (FRAME), guided by the established principle of organizing the pretraining process into four stages to achieve significant loss reductions four times. This principle is grounded in two key findings: first, training on high Perplexity (PPL) data followed by low PPL data, and second, training on low PPL difference (PD) data followed by high PD data, both causing the loss to drop significantly twice and performance enhancements. By partitioning data into four quadrants and strategically organizing them, FRAME achieves a remarkable 16.8% average improvement over random across MMLU and CMMLU for the 3B model, effectively boosting LLM performance.

Despite the growing development of long-context large language models (LLMs), data-centric approaches relying on synthetic data have been hindered by issues related to faithfulness, which limit their effectiveness in enhancing model performance on tasks such as long-context reasoning and question answering (QA). These challenges are often exacerbated by misinformation caused by lack of verification, reasoning without attribution, and potential knowledge conflicts. We propose LongFaith, a novel pipeline for synthesizing faithful long-context reasoning instruction datasets. By integrating ground truth and citation-based reasoning prompts, we eliminate distractions and improve the accuracy of reasoning chains, thus mitigating the need for costly verification processes. We open-source two synthesized datasets, LongFaith-SFT and LongFaith-PO, which systematically address multiple dimensions of faithfulness, including verified reasoning, attribution, and contextual grounding. Extensive experiments on multi-hop reasoning datasets and LongBench demonstrate that models fine-tuned on these datasets significantly improve performance. Our ablation studies highlight the scalability and adaptability of the LongFaith pipeline, showcasing its broad applicability in developing long-context LLMs.