Many recent developments in large language models focus on prompting them to perform specific tasks. One effective prompting method is in-context learning, where the model performs a (possibly new) generation/prediction task given one (or more) examples. Past work has shown that the choice of examples can make a large impact on task performance. However, finding good examples is not straightforward since the definition of a representative group of examples can vary greatly depending on the task. While there are many existing methods for selecting in-context examples, they generally score examples independently, ignoring the dependency between them and the order in which they are provided to the large language model. In this work, we propose Retrieval for In-Context Learning (RetICL), a learnable method for modeling and optimally selecting examples sequentially for in-context learning. We frame the problem of sequential example selection as a Markov decision process, design an example retriever model using an LSTM, and train it using proximal policy optimization (PPO). We validate RetICL on math problem solving datasets and show that it outperforms both heuristic and learnable baselines, and achieves state-of-the-art accuracy on the TabMWP dataset. We also use case studies to show that RetICL implicitly learns representations of math problem solving strategies.

While several previous studies have analyzed gender bias in research, we are still missing a comprehensive analysis of gender differences in the AI community, covering diverse topics and different development trends. Using the AI Scholar dataset of 78K researchers in the field of AI, we identify several gender differences: (1) Although female researchers tend to have fewer overall citations than males, this citation difference does not hold for all academic-age groups; (2) There exist large gender homophily in co-authorship on AI papers; (3) Female first-authored papers show distinct linguistic styles, such as longer text, more positive emotion words, and more catchy titles than male first-authored papers. Our analysis provides a window into the current demographic trends in our AI community, and encourages more gender equality and diversity in the future. Our code and data are at https://github.com/causalNLP/ai-scholar-gender.

Have Large Language Models (LLMs) developed a personality? The short answer is a resounding "We Don't Know!". In this paper, we show that we do not yet have the right tools to measure personality in language models. Personality is an important characteristic that influences behavior. As LLMs emulate human-like intelligence and performance in various tasks, a natural question to ask is whether these models have developed a personality. Previous works have evaluated machine personality through self-assessment personality tests, which are a set of multiple-choice questions created to evaluate personality in humans. A fundamental assumption here is that human personality tests can accurately measure personality in machines. In this paper, we investigate the emergence of personality in five LLMs of different sizes ranging from 1.5B to 30B. We propose the Option-Order Symmetry property as a necessary condition for the reliability of these self-assessment tests. Under this condition, the answer to self-assessment questions is invariant to the order in which the options are presented. We find that many LLMs personality test responses do not preserve option-order symmetry. We take a deeper look at LLMs test responses where option-order symmetry is preserved to find that in these cases, LLMs do not take into account the situational statement being tested and produce the exact same answer irrespective of the situation being tested. We also identify the existence of inherent biases in these LLMs which is the root cause of the aforementioned phenomenon and makes self-assessment tests unreliable. These observations indicate that self-assessment tests are not the correct tools to measure personality in LLMs. Through this paper, we hope to draw attention to the shortcomings of current literature in measuring personality in LLMs and call for developing tools for machine personality measurement.

Neural networks are deployed widely in natural language processing tasks on the industrial scale, and perhaps the most often they are used as compounds of automatic machine translation systems. In this work, we present a simple approach to fool state-of-the-art machine translation tools in the task of translation from Russian to English and vice versa. Using a novel black-box gradient-free tensor-based optimizer, we show that many online translation tools, such as Google, DeepL, and Yandex, may both produce wrong or offensive translations for nonsensical adversarial input queries and refuse to translate seemingly benign input phrases. This vulnerability may interfere with understanding a new language and simply worsen the user's experience while using machine translation systems, and, hence, additional improvements of these tools are required to establish better translation.

Hybrid Question-Answering (HQA), which targets reasoning over tables and passages linked from table cells, has witnessed significant research in recent years. A common challenge in HQA and other passage-table QA datasets is that it is generally unrealistic to iterate over all table rows, columns, and linked passages to retrieve evidence. Such a challenge made it difficult for previous studies to show their reasoning ability in retrieving answers. To bridge this gap, we propose a novel Table-alignment-based Cell-selection and Reasoning model (TACR) for hybrid text and table QA, evaluated on the HybridQA and WikiTableQuestions datasets. In evidence retrieval, we design a table-question-alignment enhanced cell-selection method to retrieve fine-grained evidence. In answer reasoning, we incorporate a QA module that treats the row containing selected cells as context. Experimental results over the HybridQA and WikiTableQuestions (WTQ) datasets show that TACR achieves state-of-the-art results on cell selection and outperforms fine-grained evidence retrieval baselines on HybridQA, while achieving competitive performance on WTQ. We also conducted a detailed analysis to demonstrate that being able to align questions to tables in the cell-selection stage can result in important gains from experiments of over 90\% table row and column selection accuracy, meanwhile also improving output explainability.

We release MMSMR, a Massively Multi-System MultiReference dataset to enable future work on metrics and evaluation for dialog. Automatic metrics for dialogue evaluation should be robust proxies for human judgments; however, the verification of robustness is currently far from satisfactory. To quantify the robustness correlation and understand what is necessary in a test set, we create and release an 8-reference dialog dataset by extending single-reference evaluation sets and introduce this new language learning conversation dataset. We then train 1750 systems and evaluate them on our novel test set and the DailyDialog dataset. We release the novel test set, and model hyper parameters, inference outputs, and metric scores for each system on a variety of datasets.

Weighting methods in causal inference have been widely used to achieve a desirable level of covariate balancing. However, the existing weighting methods have desirable theoretical properties only when a certain model, either the propensity score or outcome regression model, is correctly specified. In addition, the corresponding estimators do not behave well for finite samples due to large variance even when the model is correctly specified. In this paper, we consider to use the integral probability metric (IPM), which is a metric between two probability measures, for covariate balancing. Optimal weights are determined so that weighted empirical distributions for the treated and control groups have the smallest IPM value for a given set of discriminators. We prove that the corresponding estimator can be consistent without correctly specifying any model (neither the propensity score nor the outcome regression model). In addition, we empirically show that our proposed method outperforms existing weighting methods with large margins for finite samples.

Multi-vector retrieval models such as ColBERT [Khattab and Zaharia, 2020] allow token-level interactions between queries and documents, and hence achieve state of the art on many information retrieval benchmarks. However, their non-linear scoring function cannot be scaled to millions of documents, necessitating a three-stage process for inference: retrieving initial candidates via token retrieval, accessing all token vectors, and scoring the initial candidate documents. The non-linear scoring function is applied over all token vectors of each candidate document, making the inference process complicated and slow. In this paper, we aim to simplify the multi-vector retrieval by rethinking the role of token retrieval. We present XTR, ConteXtualized Token Retriever, which introduces a simple, yet novel, objective function that encourages the model to retrieve the most important document tokens first. The improvement to token retrieval allows XTR to rank candidates only using the retrieved tokens rather than all tokens in the document, and enables a newly designed scoring stage that is two-to-three orders of magnitude cheaper than that of ColBERT. On the popular BEIR benchmark, XTR advances the state-of-the-art by 2.8 nDCG@10 without any distillation. Detailed analysis confirms our decision to revisit the token retrieval stage, as XTR demonstrates much better recall of the token retrieval stage compared to ColBERT.

Machine learning (ML) systems in natural language processing (NLP) face significant challenges in generalizing to out-of-distribution (OOD) data, where the test distribution differs from the training data distribution. This poses important questions about the robustness of NLP models and their high accuracy, which may be artificially inflated due to their underlying sensitivity to systematic biases. Despite these challenges, there is a lack of comprehensive surveys on the generalization challenge from an OOD perspective in text classification. Therefore, this paper aims to fill this gap by presenting the first comprehensive review of recent progress, methods, and evaluations on this topic. We furth discuss the challenges involved and potential future research directions. By providing quick access to existing work, we hope this survey will encourage future research in this area.

The Internet revolution in 1990, followed by the data-driven and information revolution, has transformed the world as we know it. Nowadays, what seam to be 10 to 20 years ago, a science fiction idea (i.e., machines dominating the world) is seen as possible. This revolution also brought a need for new regulatory practices where user trust and artificial Intelligence (AI) discourse has a central role. This work aims to clarify some misconceptions about user trust in AI discourse and fight the tendency to design vulnerable interactions that lead to further breaches of trust, both real and perceived. Findings illustrate the lack of clarity in understanding user trust and its effects on computer science, especially in measuring user trust characteristics. It argues for clarifying those notions to avoid possible trust gaps and misinterpretations in AI adoption and appropriation.