Real-time detection and prediction of extreme weather protect human lives and infrastructure. Traditional methods rely on numerical threshold setting and manual interpretation of weather heatmaps with Geographic Information Systems (GIS), which can be slow and error-prone. Our research redefines Extreme Weather Events Detection (EWED) by framing it as a Visual Question Answering (VQA) problem, thereby introducing a more precise and automated solution. Leveraging Vision-Language Models (VLM) to simultaneously process visual and textual data, we offer an effective aid to enhance the analysis process of weather heatmaps. Our initial assessment of general-purpose VLMs (e.g., GPT-4-Vision) on EWED revealed poor performance, characterized by low accuracy and frequent hallucinations due to inadequate color differentiation and insufficient meteorological knowledge. To address these challenges, we introduce ClimateIQA, the first meteorological VQA dataset, which includes 8,760 wind gust heatmaps and 254,040 question-answer pairs covering four question types, both generated from the latest climate reanalysis data. We also propose Sparse Position and Outline Tracking (SPOT), an innovative technique that leverages OpenCV and K-Means clustering to capture and depict color contours in heatmaps, providing ClimateIQA with more accurate color spatial location information. Finally, we present Climate-Zoo, the first meteorological VLM collection, which adapts VLMs to meteorological applications using the ClimateIQA dataset. Experiment results demonstrate that models from Climate-Zoo substantially outperform state-of-the-art general VLMs, achieving an accuracy increase from 0% to over 90% in EWED verification. The datasets and models in this study are publicly available for future climate science research: https://github.com/AlexJJJChen/Climate-Zoo.

While Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) significantly enhances the generation quality of Large Language Models (LLMs), recent studies have raised concerns regarding the complexity and instability associated with the Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) algorithm, proposing a series of order-based calibration methods as viable alternatives. This paper delves further into current order-based methods, examining their inefficiencies in utilizing reward values and addressing misalignment issues. Building upon these findings, we propose a novel \textbf{V}alue-based \textbf{C}ali\textbf{B}ration (VCB) method to better align LLMs with human preferences. Experimental results demonstrate that VCB surpasses existing alignment methods on AI assistant and summarization datasets, providing impressive generalizability, robustness, and stability in diverse settings.

Due to the success of the pre-trained language model (PLM), existing PLM-based summarization models show their powerful generative capability. However, these models are trained on general-purpose summarization datasets, leading to generated summaries failing to satisfy the needs of different readers. To generate summaries with topics, many efforts have been made on topic-focused summarization. However, these works generate a summary only guided by a prompt comprising topic words. Despite their success, these methods still ignore the disturbance of sentences with non-relevant topics and only conduct cross-interaction between tokens by attention module. To address this issue, we propose a topic-arc recognition objective and topic-selective graph network. First, the topic-arc recognition objective is used to model training, which endows the capability to discriminate topics for the model. Moreover, the topic-selective graph network can conduct topic-guided cross-interaction on sentences based on the results of topic-arc recognition. In the experiments, we conduct extensive evaluations on NEWTS and COVIDET datasets. Results show that our methods achieve state-of-the-art performance.

The InstructGPT research did recruit 40 contracters to generate a dataset that GPT-3 was then fine-tuned on. But I [Quach] don't think those contractors are employed on an ongoing process to edit responses generated by the model. A spokesperson from the company just confirmed to me: "OpenAI does not hire copywriters to edit generated answers," so I don't think the claims are correct." So the above post was misleading. I'd originally titled it, "Open AI gets GPT-3 to work by hiring an army of humans to fix GPT's bad answers." I changed it to "Interesting questions involving the mix of humans and computer algorithms in Open AI's GPT-3 program." I appreciate all the helpful comments! Stochastic algorithms are hard to understand, especially when they include tuning parameters. I'd still like to know whassup with Google's LaMDA chatbot (see item 2 in this post).

In 1970, Marvin Minsky, recipient of the Turing Award ("the Nobel Prize of Computing"), predicted that within "three to eight years we will have a machine with the general intelligence of an average human being." The fundamental roadblock is that, although computer algorithms are really, really good at identifying statistical patterns, they have no way of knowing what these patterns mean because they are confined to MathWorld and never experience the real world. It's a brown-throated thrush, but in Germany it's called a halsenflugel, and in Chinese they call it a chung ling and even if you know all those names for it, you still know nothing about the bird–you only know something about people; what they call that bird. Now that thrush sings, and teaches its young to fly, and flies so many miles away during the summer across the country, and nobody knows how it finds its way," and so forth. There is a difference between the name of the thing and what goes on.