As generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies evolve, they offer unprecedented potential to automate and enhance various tasks, including coding. Natural Language-Oriented Programming (NLOP), a vision introduced in this paper, harnesses this potential by allowing developers to articulate software requirements and logic in their natural language, thereby democratizing software creation. This approach streamlines the development process and significantly lowers the barrier to entry for software engineering, making it feasible for non-experts to contribute effectively to software projects. By simplifying the transition from concept to code, NLOP can accelerate development cycles, enhance collaborative efforts, and reduce misunderstandings in requirement specifications. This paper reviews various programming models, assesses their contributions and limitations, and highlights that natural language will be the new programming language. Through this comparison, we illustrate how NLOP stands to transform the landscape of software engineering by fostering greater inclusivity and innovation.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance across a wide variety of natural language tasks. However, they have been shown to suffer from a critical limitation pertinent to 'hallucination' in their output. Recent research has focused on investigating and addressing this problem for a variety of tasks such as biography generation, question answering, abstractive summarization, and dialogue generation. However, the crucial aspect pertaining to 'negation' has remained considerably underexplored. Negation is important because it adds depth and nuance to the understanding of language and is also crucial for logical reasoning and inference. In this work, we address the above limitation and particularly focus on studying the impact of negation in LLM hallucinations. Specifically, we study four tasks with negation: 'false premise completion', 'constrained fact generation', 'multiple choice question answering', and 'fact generation'. We show that open-source state-of-the-art LLMs such as LLaMA-2-chat, Vicuna, and Orca-2 hallucinate considerably on all these tasks involving negation which underlines a critical shortcoming of these models. Addressing this problem, we further study numerous strategies to mitigate these hallucinations and demonstrate their impact.

Low-rank adaptation (LoRA) is an efficient strategy for adapting latent diffusion models (LDMs) on a private dataset to generate specific images by minimizing the adaptation loss. However, the LoRA-adapted LDMs are vulnerable to membership inference (MI) attacks that can judge whether a particular data point belongs to the private dataset, thus leading to the privacy leakage. To defend against MI attacks, we first propose a straightforward solution: Membership-Privacy-preserving LoRA (MP-LoRA). MP-LoRA is formulated as a min-max optimization problem where a proxy attack model is trained by maximizing its MI gain while the LDM is adapted by minimizing the sum of the adaptation loss and the MI gain of the proxy attack model. However, we empirically find that MP-LoRA has the issue of unstable optimization, and theoretically analyze that the potential reason is the unconstrained local smoothness, which impedes the privacy-preserving adaptation. To mitigate this issue, we further propose a Stable Membership-Privacy-preserving LoRA (SMP-LoRA) that adapts the LDM by minimizing the ratio of the adaptation loss to the MI gain. Besides, we theoretically prove that the local smoothness of SMP-LoRA can be constrained by the gradient norm, leading to improved convergence. Our experimental results corroborate that SMP-LoRA can indeed defend against MI attacks and generate high-quality images. Our code is available at https://github.com/WilliamLUO0/StablePrivateLoRA.

Following natural language instructions by executing actions in digital environments (e.g. web-browsers and REST APIs) is a challenging task for language model (LM) agents. Unfortunately, LM agents often fail to generalize to new environments without human demonstrations. This work presents BAGEL, a method for bootstrapping LM agents without human supervision. BAGEL converts a seed set of randomly explored trajectories or synthetic instructions, into demonstrations, via round-trips between two noisy LM components: an LM labeler which converts a trajectory into a synthetic instruction, and a zero-shot LM agent which maps the synthetic instruction into a refined trajectory. By performing these round-trips iteratively, BAGEL quickly converts the initial distribution of trajectories towards those that are well-described by natural language. We use BAGEL demonstrations to adapt a zero shot LM agent at test time via in-context learning over retrieved demonstrations, and find improvements of over 2-13% absolute on ToolQA and MiniWob++, with up to 13x reduction in execution failures.

There is a lot of fear about robots replacing human. But maybe it should be the machines worrying about us. Swedish scientists have created the world's first'living computer' that is made out of human brain tissue. It composes of 16 organoids, or clumps of brain cells that were grown in a lab, which send information between each other. They work much like a traditional computer chip - sending and receiving signals through their neurons that act like circuits.

Traditional image clustering techniques only find a single grouping within visual data. In particular, they do not provide a possibility to explicitly define multiple types of clustering. This work explores the potential of large vision-language models to facilitate alternative image clustering. We propose Text-Guided Alternative Image Consensus Clustering (TGAICC), a novel approach that leverages user-specified interests via prompts to guide the discovery of diverse clusterings. To achieve this, it generates a clustering for each prompt, groups them using hierarchical clustering, and then aggregates them using consensus clustering. TGAICC outperforms image- and text-based baselines on four alternative image clustering benchmark datasets. Furthermore, using count-based word statistics, we are able to obtain text-based explanations of the alternative clusterings. In conclusion, our research illustrates how contemporary large vision-language models can transform explanatory data analysis, enabling the generation of insightful, customizable, and diverse image clusterings.

How can we trust the correctness of a learned model on a particular input of interest? Model accuracy is typically measured *on average* over a distribution of inputs, giving no guarantee for any fixed input. This paper proposes a theoretically-founded solution to this problem: to train *Self-Proving models* that prove the correctness of their output to a verification algorithm $V$ via an Interactive Proof. Self-Proving models satisfy that, with high probability over a random input, the model generates a correct output *and* successfully proves its correctness to $V\!$. The *soundness* property of $V$ guarantees that, for *every* input, no model can convince $V$ of the correctness of an incorrect output. Thus, a Self-Proving model proves correctness of most of its outputs, while *all* incorrect outputs (of any model) are detected by $V$. We devise a generic method for learning Self-Proving models, and we prove convergence bounds under certain assumptions. The theoretical framework and results are complemented by experiments on an arithmetic capability: computing the greatest common divisor (GCD) of two integers. Our learning method is used to train a Self-Proving transformer that computes the GCD *and* proves the correctness of its answer.

Scientific collaboration is a significant behavior in knowledge creation and idea exchange. To tackle large and complex research questions, a trend of team formation has been observed in recent decades. In this study, we focus on recognizing collaborative teams and exploring inner patterns using scholarly big graph data. We propose a collaborative team recognition (CORE) model with a "core + extension" team structure to recognize collaborative teams in large academic networks. In CORE, we combine an effective evaluation index called the collaboration intensity index with a series of structural features to recognize collaborative teams in which members are in close collaboration relationships. Then, CORE is used to guide the core team members to their extension members. CORE can also serve as the foundation for team-based research. The simulation results indicate that CORE reveals inner patterns of scientific collaboration: senior scholars have broad collaborative relationships and fixed collaboration patterns, which are the underlying mechanisms of team assembly. The experimental results demonstrate that CORE is promising compared with state-of-the-art methods.

Data augmentation has the potential to improve the performance of machine learning models by increasing the amount of training data available. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of different data augmentation techniques for a multi-label emotion classification task using a low-resource dataset. Our results showed that Back Translation outperformed autoencoder-based approaches and that generating multiple examples per training instance led to further performance improvement. In addition, we found that Back Translation generated the most diverse set of unigrams and trigrams. These findings demonstrate the utility of Back Translation in enhancing the performance of emotion classification models in resource-limited situations.

We introduce WildBench, an automated evaluation framework designed to benchmark large language models (LLMs) using challenging, real-world user queries. WildBench consists of 1,024 tasks carefully selected from over one million human-chatbot conversation logs. For automated evaluation with WildBench, we have developed two metrics, WB-Reward and WB-Score, which are computable using advanced LLMs such as GPT-4-turbo. WildBench evaluation uses task-specific checklists to evaluate model outputs systematically and provides structured explanations that justify the scores and comparisons, resulting in more reliable and interpretable automatic judgments. WB-Reward employs fine-grained pairwise comparisons between model responses, generating five potential outcomes: much better, slightly better, slightly worse, much worse, or a tie. Unlike previous evaluations that employed a single baseline model, we selected three baseline models at varying performance levels to ensure a comprehensive pairwise evaluation. Additionally, we propose a simple method to mitigate length bias, by converting outcomes of ``slightly better/worse'' to ``tie'' if the winner response exceeds the loser one by more than $K$ characters. WB-Score evaluates the quality of model outputs individually, making it a fast and cost-efficient evaluation metric. WildBench results demonstrate a strong correlation with the human-voted Elo ratings from Chatbot Arena on hard tasks. Specifically, WB-Reward achieves a Pearson correlation of 0.98 with top-ranking models. Additionally, WB-Score reaches 0.95, surpassing both ArenaHard's 0.91 and AlpacaEval2.0's 0.89 for length-controlled win rates, as well as the 0.87 for regular win rates.