Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) is a crucial task in information extraction and sentiment analysis, aiming to identify aspects with associated sentiment elements in text. However, existing ABSA datasets are predominantly English-centric, limiting the scope for multilingual evaluation and research. To bridge this gap, we present M-ABSA, a comprehensive dataset spanning 7 domains and 21 languages, making it the most extensive multilingual parallel dataset for ABSA to date. Our primary focus is on triplet extraction, which involves identifying aspect terms, aspect categories, and sentiment polarities. The dataset is constructed through an automatic translation process with human review to ensure quality. We perform extensive experiments using various baselines to assess performance and compatibility on M-ABSA. Our empirical findings highlight that the dataset enables diverse evaluation tasks, such as multilingual and multi-domain transfer learning, and large language model evaluation, underscoring its inclusivity and its potential to drive advancements in multilingual ABSA research.

Access to digital information is a driver of economic development. But although 85% of sub-Saharan Africa's population is covered by mobile broadband signal, only 37% use the internet, and those who do seldom use the web. We investigate whether AI can bridge this gap by analyzing how 469 teachers use an AI chatbot in Sierra Leone. The chatbot, accessible via a common messaging app, is compared against traditional web search. Teachers use AI more frequently than web search for teaching assistance. Data cost is the most frequently cited reason for low internet usage across Africa. The average web search result consumes 3,107 times more data than an AI response, making AI 87% less expensive than web search. Additionally, only 2% of results for corresponding web searches contain content from Sierra Leone. In blinded evaluations, an independent sample of teachers rate AI responses as more relevant, helpful, and correct than web search results. These findings suggest that AI-driven solutions can cost-effectively bridge information gaps in low-connectivity regions.

In this paper, we leverage recent advancements in feature monosemanticity to extract interpretable features from deep multimodal models, offering a data-driven understanding of modality gaps. Specifically, we investigate CLIP (Contrastive Language-Image Pretraining), a prominent visual-language representation model trained on extensive image-text pairs. Building upon interpretability tools developed for single-modal models, we extend these methodologies to assess multi-modal interpretability of CLIP features. Additionally, we introduce the Modality Dominance Score (MDS) to attribute the interpretability of each feature to its respective modality. Next, we transform CLIP features into a more interpretable space, enabling us to categorize them into three distinct classes: vision features (single-modal), language features (single-modal), and visual-language features (cross-modal). Our findings reveal that this categorization aligns closely with human cognitive understandings of different modalities. We also demonstrate significant use cases of this modality-specific features including detecting gender bias, adversarial attack defense and text-to-image model editing. These results indicate that large-scale multimodal models, equipped with task-agnostic interpretability tools, offer valuable insights into key connections and distinctions between different modalities.

The problem of explaining inconsistency-tolerant reasoning in knowledge bases (KBs) is a prominent topic in Artificial Intelligence (AI). While there is some work on this problem, the explanations provided by existing approaches often lack critical information or fail to be expressive enough for non-binary conflicts. In this paper, we identify structural weaknesses of the state-of-the-art and propose a generic argumentation-based approach to address these problems. This approach is defined for logics involving reasoning with maximal consistent subsets and shows how any such logic can be translated to argumentation. Our work provides dialogue models as dialectic-proof procedures to compute and explain a query answer wrt inconsistency-tolerant semantics. This allows us to construct dialectical proof trees as explanations, which are more expressive and arguably more intuitive than existing explanation formalisms.

The paper explores the performance of LLMs in the context of multi-dimensional analytic writing assessments, i.e. their ability to provide both scores and comments based on multiple assessment criteria. Using a corpus of literature reviews written by L2 graduate students and assessed by human experts against 9 analytic criteria, we prompt several popular LLMs to perform the same task under various conditions. To evaluate the quality of feedback comments, we apply a novel feedback comment quality evaluation framework. This framework is interpretable, cost-efficient, scalable, and reproducible, compared to existing methods that rely on manual judgments. We find that LLMs can generate reasonably good and generally reliable multi-dimensional analytic assessments. We release our corpus for reproducibility.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in commonsense reasoning; however, some variations in questions can trigger incorrect responses. Do these models truly understand commonsense knowledge, or just memorize expression patterns? To investigate this question, we present the first extensive robustness evaluation of LLMs in commonsense reasoning. We introduce HellaSwag-Pro, a large-scale bilingual benchmark consisting of 11,200 cases, by designing and compiling seven types of question variants. To construct this benchmark, we propose a two-stage method to develop Chinese HellaSwag, a finely annotated dataset comprising 12,000 instances across 56 categories. We conduct extensive experiments on 41 representative LLMs, revealing that these LLMs are far from robust in commonsense reasoning. Furthermore, this robustness varies depending on the language in which the LLM is tested. This work establishes a high-quality evaluation benchmark, with extensive experiments offering valuable insights to the community in commonsense reasoning for LLMs.

The conversion of natural language into SQL language for querying databases (Text-to-SQL) has broad application prospects and has attracted widespread attention. At present, the mainstream Text-to-SQL methods are mainly divided into in-context learning (ICL) based methods and supervised fine-tuning (SFT) based methods. ICL-based methods can achieve relatively good results thanks to the use of the most advanced closed-source models. However, in real-world application scenarios, factors such as data privacy, SQL generation efficiency and cost need to be considered. SFT-based methods have certain advantages. At present, methods based on fine-tuning of open source models lack easy-to-implement and effective (cost-effective) baseline methods. We propose a pipeline-based method using open source model fine-tuning, referred to as BASE-SQL, which includes four components: Schema Linking, Candidate SQL Generate, SQL Revision and SQL Merge Revision. Experimental results show that BASE-SQL uses the open source model Qwen2.5-Coder-32B-Instruct, and achieves an accuracy of 67.47% on the BIRD development set and 88.9% on the Spider test set, which is significantly better than other methods using open source models, and even exceeds several methods using the GPT-4o closed-source model. At the same time, BASE-SQL is easy to implement and highly efficient (on average, only five calls to the large language model are required to generate SQL once). The code will be open sourced at https://github.com/CycloneBoy/base_sql.

OpenAI o1 has shown that applying reinforcement learning to integrate reasoning steps directly during inference can significantly improve a model's reasoning capabilities. This result is exciting as the field transitions from the conventional autoregressive method of generating answers to a more deliberate approach that models the slow-thinking process through step-by-step reasoning training. Reinforcement learning plays a key role in both the model's training and decoding processes. In this article, we present a comprehensive formulation of reasoning problems and investigate the use of both model-based and model-free approaches to better support this slow-thinking framework.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have revolutionized web-scale ranking systems, enabling breakthroughs in capturing complex user behaviors and driving performance gains. At DoorDash, we first harnessed this transformative power by transitioning our homepage Ads ranking system from traditional tree based models to cutting edge multi task DNNs. This evolution sparked advancements in data foundations, model design, training efficiency, evaluation rigor, and online serving, delivering substantial business impact and reshaping our approach to machine learning. In this paper, we talk about our problem driven journey, from identifying the right problems and crafting targeted solutions to overcoming the complexity of developing and scaling a deep learning recommendation system. Through our successes and learned lessons, we aim to share insights and practical guidance to teams pursuing similar advancements in machine learning systems.

We study the potential of large language models (LLMs) as proxies for humans to simplify preference elicitation (PE) in combinatorial assignment. While traditional PE methods rely on iterative queries to capture preferences, LLMs offer a one-shot alternative with reduced human effort. We propose a framework for LLM proxies that can work in tandem with SOTA ML-powered preference elicitation schemes. Our framework handles the novel challenges introduced by LLMs, such as response variability and increased computational costs. We experimentally evaluate the efficiency of LLM proxies against human queries in the well-studied course allocation domain, and we investigate the model capabilities required for success. We find that our approach improves allocative efficiency by up to 20%, and these results are robust across different LLMs and to differences in quality and accuracy of reporting.