This paper presents a novel framework for full-waveform seismic source inversion using simulation-based inference (SBI). Traditional probabilistic approaches often rely on simplifying assumptions about data errors, which we show can lead to inaccurate uncertainty quantification. SBI addresses this limitation by building an empirical probabilistic model of the data errors using machine learning models, known as neural density estimators, which can then be integrated into the Bayesian inference framework. We apply the SBI framework to point-source moment tensor inversions as well as joint moment tensor and time-location inversions. We construct a range of synthetic examples to explore the quality of the SBI solutions, as well as to compare the SBI results with standard Gaussian likelihood-based Bayesian inversions. We then demonstrate that under real seismic noise, common Gaussian likelihood assumptions for treating full-waveform data yield overconfident posterior distributions that underestimate the moment tensor component uncertainties by up to a factor of 3. We contrast this with SBI, which produces well-calibrated posteriors that generally agree with the true seismic source parameters, and offers an order-of-magnitude reduction in the number of simulations required to perform inference compared to standard Monte Carlo techniques. Finally, we apply our methodology to a pair of moderate magnitude earthquakes in the North Atlantic. We utilise seismic waveforms recorded by the recent UPFLOW ocean bottom seismometer array as well as by regional land stations in the Azores, comparing full moment tensor and source-time location posteriors between SBI and a Gaussian likelihood approach. We find that our adaptation of SBI can be directly applied to real earthquake sources to efficiently produce high quality posterior distributions that significantly improve upon Gaussian likelihood approaches.

Lexical-semantic resources (LSRs), such as online lexicons or wordnets, are fundamental for natural language processing applications. In many languages, however, such resources suffer from quality issues: incorrect entries, incompleteness, but also, the rarely addressed issue of bias towards the English language and Anglo-Saxon culture. Such bias manifests itself in the absence of concepts specific to the language or culture at hand, the presence of foreign (Anglo-Saxon) concepts, as well as in the lack of an explicit indication of untranslatability, also known as cross-lingual \emph{lexical gaps}, when a term has no equivalent in another language. This paper proposes a novel crowdsourcing methodology for reducing bias in LSRs. Crowd workers compare lexemes from two languages, focusing on domains rich in lexical diversity, such as kinship or food. Our LingoGap crowdsourcing tool facilitates comparisons through microtasks identifying equivalent terms, language-specific terms, and lexical gaps across languages. We validated our method by applying it to two case studies focused on food-related terminology: (1) English and Arabic, and (2) Standard Indonesian and Banjarese. These experiments identified 2,140 lexical gaps in the first case study and 951 in the second. The success of these experiments confirmed the usability of our method and tool for future large-scale lexicon enrichment tasks.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) addresses key limitations of large language models (LLMs), such as hallucinations and outdated knowledge, by incorporating external databases. These databases typically consult multiple sources to encompass up-to-date and various information. However, standard RAG methods often overlook the heterogeneous source reliability in the multi-source database and retrieve documents solely based on relevance, making them prone to propagating misinformation. To address this, we propose Reliability-Aware RAG (RA-RAG) which estimates the reliability of multiple sources and incorporates this information into both retrieval and aggregation processes. Specifically, it iteratively estimates source reliability and true answers for a set of queries with no labelling. Then, it selectively retrieves relevant documents from a few of reliable sources and aggregates them using weighted majority voting, where the selective retrieval ensures scalability while not compromising the performance. We also introduce a benchmark designed to reflect real-world scenarios with heterogeneous source reliability and demonstrate the effectiveness of RA-RAG compared to a set of baselines.

Large language models (LLMs) are susceptible to hallucinations-outputs that are ungrounded, factually incorrect, or inconsistent with prior generations. We focus on close-book Question Answering (CBQA), where previous work has not fully addressed the distinction between two possible kinds of hallucinations, namely, whether the model (1) does not hold the correct answer in its parameters or (2) answers incorrectly despite having the required knowledge. We argue that distinguishing these cases is crucial for detecting and mitigating hallucinations. Specifically, case (2) may be mitigated by intervening in the model's internal computation, as the knowledge resides within the model's parameters. In contrast, in case (1) there is no parametric knowledge to leverage for mitigation, so it should be addressed by resorting to an external knowledge source or abstaining. To help distinguish between the two cases, we introduce Wrong Answer despite having Correct Knowledge (WACK), an approach for constructing model-specific datasets for the second hallucination type. Our probing experiments indicate that the two kinds of hallucinations are represented differently in the model's inner states. Next, we show that datasets constructed using WACK exhibit variations across models, demonstrating that even when models share knowledge of certain facts, they still vary in the specific examples that lead to hallucinations. Finally, we show that training a probe on our WACK datasets leads to better hallucination detection of case (2) hallucinations than using the common generic one-size-fits-all datasets. The code is available at https://github.com/technion-cs-nlp/hallucination-mitigation .

Prior to our efforts, there has already been work striving towards this goal. For example, Self-ICL (Chen et al., 2023) begins by prompting the LLM to generate few-shot new, diverse, and creative proxy queries tailored to the target task, and then solves each of that independently using the ZS-CoT manner, which in turn yields proxy exemplars for prompting LLMs to engage in reasoning. Auto-ICL (Yang et al., 2023) operates similarly to Self-ICL, but it differs in that Auto-ICL instructs the LLM to produce proxy queries that have the same structure as the given query. Analogical Prompting (Yasunaga et al., 2023) draws on the cognitive process of solving new problems from relevant past experiences, i.e., inspired by analogical reasoning, which prompts the language model to self-generate relevant examples in context before embarking on the solution of a given query. Notably, the one-pass generation mode employed in Analogical Prompting necessitates that the LLM possesses robust capabilities for both following instructions and generating responses. We revisit the aforementioned approaches and discern that their efficacy hinges on guiding the LLM to recall experiences relevant to the given query. However, solely considering such experiences may lead to the generation of proxy queries that are as challenging as the given query, along with corresponding erroneous proxy solutions, potentially misleading the solution of the original given query.

Large Language Models (LLMs) suffer from hallucinations, referring to the nonfactual information in generated content, despite their superior capacities across tasks. Meanwhile, knowledge editing has been developed as a new popular paradigm to correct the erroneous factual knowledge encoded in LLMs with the advantage of avoiding retraining from scratch. However, one common issue of existing evaluation datasets for knowledge editing is that they do not ensure LLMs actually generate hallucinated answers to the evaluation questions before editing. When LLMs are evaluated on such datasets after being edited by different techniques, it is hard to directly adopt the performance to assess the effectiveness of different knowledge editing methods in correcting hallucinations. Thus, the fundamental question remains insufficiently validated: Can knowledge editing really correct hallucinations in LLMs? We proposed HalluEditBench to holistically benchmark knowledge editing methods in correcting real-world hallucinations. First, we rigorously construct a massive hallucination dataset with 9 domains, 26 topics and more than 6, 000 hallucinations. Then, we assess the performance of knowledge editing methods in a holistic way on five dimensions including Efficacy, Generalization, Portability, Locality, and Robustness. Through HalluEditBench, we have provided new insights into the potentials and limitations of different knowledge editing methods in correcting hallucinations, which could inspire future improvements and facilitate the progress in the field of knowledge editing. Considering Table 1: Performance measured by Accuracy (%) the high cost of retraining LLMs from scratch, of Llama2-7B before editing ("Pre-edit") and after knowledge editing has been designed as a new applying typical knowledge editing methods ("Postedit") paradigm to correct erroneous or outdated factual on common existing evaluation datasets. When such datasets are adopted to evaluate the performance of LLMs after being edited, it is hard to directly use the scores to judge the effectiveness of different knowledge editing techniques in correcting hallucinations, which is the motivation of applying knowledge editing to LLMs. To better illustrate this point, following the evaluation setting in (Zhang et al., 2024e), we conducted a preliminary study to examine the pre-edit and post-edit performances of Llama2-7B on the aforementioned Who is the Chief Scientist of OpenAI? Who is the Chief Scientist of OpenAI? Who is the Chief Scientist of OpenAI?

As language models (LMs) become integral to fields like healthcare, law, and journalism, their ability to differentiate between fact, belief, and knowledge is essential for reliable decision-making. Failure to grasp these distinctions can lead to significant consequences in areas such as medical diagnosis, legal judgments, and dissemination of fake news. Despite this, current literature has largely focused on more complex issues such as theory of mind, overlooking more fundamental epistemic challenges. This study systematically evaluates the epistemic reasoning capabilities of modern LMs, including GPT-4, Claude-3, and Llama-3, using a new dataset, KaBLE, consisting of 13,000 questions across 13 tasks. Our results reveal key limitations. First, while LMs achieve 86% accuracy on factual scenarios, their performance drops significantly with false scenarios, particularly in belief-related tasks. Second, LMs struggle with recognizing and affirming personal beliefs, especially when those beliefs contradict factual data, which raises concerns for applications in healthcare and counseling, where engaging with a person's beliefs is critical. Third, we identify a salient bias in how LMs process first-person versus third-person beliefs, performing better on third-person tasks (80.7%) compared to first-person tasks (54.4%). Fourth, LMs lack a robust understanding of the factive nature of knowledge, namely, that knowledge inherently requires truth. Fifth, LMs rely on linguistic cues for fact-checking and sometimes bypass the deeper reasoning. These findings highlight significant concerns about current LMs' ability to reason about truth, belief, and knowledge while emphasizing the need for advancements in these areas before broad deployment in critical sectors.

Power outages have become increasingly frequent, intense, and prolonged in the US due to climate change, aging electrical grids, and rising energy demand. However, largely due to the absence of granular spatiotemporal outage data, we lack data-driven evidence and analytics-based metrics to quantify power system vulnerability. This limitation has hindered the ability to effectively evaluate and address vulnerability to power outages in US communities. Here, we collected ~179 million power outage records at 15-minute intervals across 3022 US contiguous counties (96.15% of the area) from 2014 to 2023. We developed a power system vulnerability assessment framework based on three dimensions (intensity, frequency, and duration) and applied interpretable machine learning models (XGBoost and SHAP) to compute Power System Vulnerability Index (PSVI) at the county level. Our analysis reveals a consistent increase in power system vulnerability over the past decade. We identified 318 counties across 45 states as hotspots for high power system vulnerability, particularly in the West Coast (California and Washington), the East Coast (Florida and the Northeast area), the Great Lakes megalopolis (Chicago-Detroit metropolitan areas), and the Gulf of Mexico (Texas). Heterogeneity analysis indicates that urban counties, counties with interconnected grids, and states with high solar generation exhibit significantly higher vulnerability. Our results highlight the significance of the proposed PSVI for evaluating the vulnerability of communities to power outages. The findings underscore the widespread and pervasive impact of power outages across the country and offer crucial insights to support infrastructure operators, policymakers, and emergency managers in formulating policies and programs aimed at enhancing the resilience of the US power infrastructure.

As large language models become increasingly central to solving complex tasks, the challenge of optimizing long, unstructured prompts has become critical. Existing optimization techniques often struggle to effectively handle such prompts, leading to suboptimal performance. We introduce SCULPT (Systematic Tuning of Long Prompts), a novel framework that systematically refines long prompts by structuring them hierarchically and applying an iterative actor-critic mechanism. To enhance robustness and generalizability, SCULPT utilizes two complementary feedback mechanisms: Preliminary Assessment, which assesses the prompt's structure before execution, and Error Assessment, which diagnoses and addresses errors post-execution. By aggregating feedback from these mechanisms, SCULPT avoids overfitting and ensures consistent improvements in performance. Our experimental results demonstrate significant accuracy gains and enhanced robustness, particularly in handling erroneous and misaligned prompts. SCULPT consistently outperforms existing approaches, establishing itself as a scalable solution for optimizing long prompts across diverse and real-world tasks.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown great promise in machine translation, but they still struggle with contextually dependent terms, such as new or domain-specific words. This leads to inconsistencies and errors that are difficult to address. Existing solutions often depend on manual identification of such terms, which is impractical given the complexity and evolving nature of language. While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) could provide some assistance, its application to translation is limited by issues such as hallucinations from information overload. In this paper, we propose CRAT, a novel multi-agent translation framework that leverages RAG and causality-enhanced self-reflection to address these challenges. This framework consists of several specialized agents: the Unknown Terms Identification agent detects unknown terms within the context, the Knowledge Graph (KG) Constructor agent extracts relevant internal knowledge about these terms and retrieves bilingual information from external sources, the Causality-enhanced Judge agent validates the accuracy of the information, and the Translator agent incorporates the refined information into the final output. This automated process allows for more precise and consistent handling of key terms during translation. Our results show that CRAT significantly improves translation accuracy, particularly in handling context-sensitive terms and emerging vocabulary.