Artificial neural networks often struggle with catastrophic forgetting when learning multiple tasks sequentially, as training on new tasks degrades the performance on previously learned ones. Recent theoretical work has addressed this issue by analysing learning curves in synthetic frameworks under predefined training protocols. However, these protocols relied on heuristics and lacked a solid theoretical foundation assessing their optimality. In this paper, we fill this gap combining exact equations for training dynamics, derived using statistical physics techniques, with optimal control methods. We apply this approach to teacher-student models for continual learning and multi-task problems, obtaining a theory for task-selection protocols maximising performance while minimising forgetting. Our theoretical analysis offers non-trivial yet interpretable strategies for mitigating catastrophic forgetting, shedding light on how optimal learning protocols can modulate established effects, such as the influence of task similarity on forgetting. Finally, we validate our theoretical findings on real-world data.

Vision Language Models (VLMs) extend remarkable capabilities of text-only large language models and vision-only models, and are able to learn from and process multi-modal vision-text input. While modern VLMs perform well on a number of standard image classification and image-text matching tasks, they still struggle with a number of crucial vision-language (VL) reasoning abilities such as counting and spatial reasoning. Moreover, while they might be very brittle to small variations in instructions and/or evaluation protocols, existing benchmarks fail to evaluate their robustness (or rather the lack of it). In order to couple challenging VL scenarios with comprehensive robustness evaluation, we introduce DARE, Diverse Visual Question Answering with Robustness Evaluation, a carefully created and curated multiple-choice VQA benchmark. DARE evaluates VLM performance on five diverse categories and includes four robustness-oriented evaluations based on the variations of: prompts, the subsets of answer options, the output format and the number of correct answers. Among a spectrum of other findings, we report that state-of-the-art VLMs still struggle with questions in most categories and are unable to consistently deliver their peak performance across the tested robustness evaluations. The worst case performance across the subsets of options is up to 34% below the performance in the standard case. The robustness of the open-source VLMs such as LLaVA 1.6 and Idefics2 cannot match the closed-source models such as GPT-4 and Gemini, but even the latter remain very brittle to different variations.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has shown its remarkable and generalizable capability in legged locomotion through sim-to-real transfer. However, while adaptive methods like domain randomization are expected to make policy more robust to diverse environments, such comprehensiveness potentially detracts from the policy's performance in any specific environment according to the No Free Lunch theorem, leading to a suboptimal solution once deployed in the real world. To address this issue, we propose a lifelong policy adaptation framework named LoopSR, which utilizes a transformer-based encoder to project real-world trajectories into a latent space, and accordingly reconstruct the real-world environments back in simulation for further improvement. Autoencoder architecture and contrastive learning methods are adopted to better extract the characteristics of real-world dynamics. The simulation parameters for continual training are derived by combining predicted parameters from the decoder with retrieved parameters from the simulation trajectory dataset. By leveraging the continual training, LoopSR achieves superior data efficiency compared with strong baselines, with only a limited amount of data to yield eminent performance in both sim-to-sim and sim-to-real experiments.

This paper introduces AMMORE, a new dataset of 53,000 math open-response question-answer pairs from Rori, a learning platform used by students in several African countries and conducts two experiments to evaluate the use of large language models (LLM) for grading particularly challenging student answers. The AMMORE dataset enables various potential analyses and provides an important resource for researching student math acquisition in understudied, real-world, educational contexts. In experiment 1 we use a variety of LLM-driven approaches, including zero-shot, few-shot, and chain-of-thought prompting, to grade the 1% of student answers that a rule-based classifier fails to grade accurately. We find that the best-performing approach -- chain-of-thought prompting -- accurately scored 92% of these edge cases, effectively boosting the overall accuracy of the grading from 98.7% to 99.9%. In experiment 2, we aim to better understand the consequential validity of the improved grading accuracy, by passing grades generated by the best-performing LLM-based approach to a Bayesian Knowledge Tracing (BKT) model, which estimated student mastery of specific lessons. We find that relatively modest improvements in model accuracy at the individual question level can lead to significant changes in the estimation of student mastery. Where the rules-based classifier currently used to grade student, answers misclassified the mastery status of 6.9% of students across their completed lessons, using the LLM chain-of-thought approach this misclassification rate was reduced to 2.6% of students. Taken together, these findings suggest that LLMs could be a valuable tool for grading open-response questions in K-12 mathematics education, potentially enabling encouraging wider adoption of open-ended questions in formative assessment.

This paper addresses a challenging interactive task learning scenario we call rearrangement under unawareness: to manipulate a rigid-body environment in a context where the robot is unaware of a concept that's key to solving the instructed task. We propose SECURE, an interactive task learning framework designed to solve such problems by fixing a deficient domain model using embodied conversation. Through dialogue, the robot discovers and then learns to exploit unforeseen possibilities. Using SECURE, the robot not only learns from the user's corrective feedback when it makes a mistake, but it also learns to make strategic dialogue decisions for revealing useful evidence about novel concepts for solving the instructed task. Together, these abilities allow the robot to generalise to subsequent tasks using newly acquired knowledge. We demonstrate that a robot that is semantics-aware -- that is, it exploits the logical consequences of both sentence and discourse semantics in the learning and inference process -- learns to solve rearrangement under unawareness more effectively than a robot that lacks such capabilities.

This study aims to investigate whether GPT-4 can effectively grade assignments for design university students and provide useful feedback. In design education, assignments do not have a single correct answer and often involve solving an open-ended design problem. This subjective nature of design projects often leads to grading problems,as grades can vary between different raters,for instance instructor from engineering background or architecture background. This study employs an iterative research approach in developing a Custom GPT with the aim of achieving more reliable results and testing whether it can provide design students with constructive feedback. The findings include: First,through several rounds of iterations the inter-reliability between GPT and human raters reached a level that is generally accepted by educators. This indicates that by providing accurate prompts to GPT,and continuously iterating to build a Custom GPT, it can be used to effectively grade students' design assignments, serving as a reliable complement to human raters. Second, the intra-reliability of GPT's scoring at different times is between 0.65 and 0.78. This indicates that, with adequate instructions, a Custom GPT gives consistent results which is a precondition for grading students. As consistency and comparability are the two main rules to ensure the reliability of educational assessment, this study has looked at whether a Custom GPT can be developed that adheres to these two rules. We finish the paper by testing whether Custom GPT can provide students with useful feedback and reflecting on how educators can develop and iterate a Custom GPT to serve as a complementary rater.

The increasing demand for intelligent assistants in human-populated environments has motivated significant research in autonomous robotic systems. Traditional service robots and virtual assistants, however, struggle with real-world task execution due to their limited capacity for dynamic reasoning and interaction, particularly when human collaboration is required. Recent developments in Large Language Models have opened new avenues for improving these systems, enabling more sophisticated reasoning and natural interaction capabilities. In this paper, we introduce AssistantX, an LLM-powered proactive assistant designed to operate autonomously in a physical office environment. Unlike conventional service robots, AssistantX leverages a novel multi-agent architecture, PPDR4X, which provides advanced inference capabilities and comprehensive collaboration awareness. By effectively bridging the gap between virtual operations and physical interactions, AssistantX demonstrates robust performance in managing complex real-world scenarios. Our evaluation highlights the architecture's effectiveness, showing that AssistantX can respond to clear instructions, actively retrieve supplementary information from memory, and proactively seek collaboration from team members to ensure successful task completion. More details and videos can be found at https://assistantx-agent.github.io/AssistantX/.

Long text summarization, gradually being essential for efficiently processing large volumes of information, stays challenging for Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT and LLaMA families because of the insufficient open-sourced training datasets and the high requirement of contextual details dealing. To address the issue, we design a novel zero-shot transfer learning framework, abbreviated as T3, to iteratively training a baseline LLM on an assistant task for the target task, where the former should own richer data resources and share structural or semantic similarity with the latter. In practice, T3 is approached to deal with the long text summarization task by utilizing question answering as the assistant task, and further validated its effectiveness on the BBC summary, NarraSum, FairytaleQA, and NLQuAD datasets, with up to nearly 14% improvement in ROUGE, 35% improvement in BLEU, and 16% improvement in Factscore compared to three baseline LLMs, demonstrating its potential for more assistant-target task combinations.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various tasks but their performance in complex logical reasoning tasks remains unsatisfactory. Although some prompting methods, such as Chain-of-Thought, can improve the reasoning ability of LLMs to some extent, they suffer from an unfaithful issue where derived conclusions may not align with the generated reasoning chain. To address this issue, some studies employ the approach of propositional logic to further enhance logical reasoning abilities of LLMs. However, the potential omissions in the extraction of logical expressions in these methods can cause information loss in the logical reasoning process, thereby generating incorrect results. To this end, we propose Logic-of-Thought (LoT) prompting which employs propositional logic to generate expanded logical information from input context, and utilizes the generated logical information as an additional augmentation to the input prompts, thereby enhancing the capability of logical reasoning. The LoT is orthogonal to existing prompting methods and can be seamlessly integrated with them. Extensive experiments demonstrate that LoT boosts the performance of various prompting methods with a striking margin across five logical reasoning tasks.

Language models are known to hallucinate incorrect information, and it is unclear if they are sufficiently accurate and reliable for use in scientific research. We developed a rigorous human-AI comparison methodology to evaluate language model agents on real-world literature search tasks covering information retrieval, summarization, and contradiction detection tasks. We show that PaperQA2, a frontier language model agent optimized for improved factuality, matches or exceeds subject matter expert performance on three realistic literature research tasks without any restrictions on humans (i.e., full access to internet, search tools, and time). PaperQA2 writes cited, Wikipedia-style summaries of scientific topics that are significantly more accurate than existing, human-written Wikipedia articles. We also introduce a hard benchmark for scientific literature research called LitQA2 that guided design of PaperQA2, leading to it exceeding human performance. Finally, we apply PaperQA2 to identify contradictions within the scientific literature, an important scientific task that is challenging for humans. PaperQA2 identifies 2.34 +/- 1.99 contradictions per paper in a random subset of biology papers, of which 70% are validated by human experts. These results demonstrate that language model agents are now capable of exceeding domain experts across meaningful tasks on scientific literature.