Recent advances in deep learning have promoted the advent of many computational systems capable of performing intelligent actions that, until then, were restricted to the human intellect. In the particular case of human languages, these advances allowed the introduction of applications like ChatGPT that are capable of generating coherent text without being explicitly programmed to do so. Instead, these models use large volumes of textual data to learn meaningful representations of human languages. Associated with these advances, concerns about copyright and data privacy infringements caused by these applications have emerged. Despite these concerns, the pace at which new natural language processing applications continued to be developed largely outperformed the introduction of new regulations. Today, communication barriers between legal experts and computer scientists motivate many unintentional legal infringements during the development of such applications. In this paper, a multidisciplinary team intends to bridge this communication gap and promote more compliant Portuguese NLP research by presenting a series of everyday NLP use cases, while highlighting the Portuguese legislation that may arise during its development.

Warning: This paper contains potentially offensive and harmful text. As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly prevalent and integrated into autonomous systems, ensuring their safety is imperative. Despite significant strides toward safety alignment, recent work GCG (Zou et al., 2023) proposes a discrete token optimization algorithm and selects the single suffix with the lowest loss to successfully jailbreak aligned LLMs. In this work, we first discuss the drawbacks of solely picking the suffix with the lowest loss during GCG optimization for jailbreaking and uncover the missed successful suffixes during the intermediate steps. Moreover, we utilize those successful suffixes as training data to learn a generative model, named AmpleGCG, which captures the distribution of adversarial suffixes given a harmful query and enables the rapid generation of hundreds of suffixes for any harmful queries in seconds. AmpleGCG achieves near 100% attack success rate (ASR) on two aligned LLMs (Llama-2-7B-chat and Vicuna-7B), surpassing two strongest attack baselines. More interestingly, AmpleGCG also transfers seamlessly to attack different models, including closed-source LLMs, achieving a 99% ASR on the latest GPT-3.5. To summarize, our work amplifies the impact of GCG by training a generative model of adversarial suffixes that is universal to any harmful queries and transferable from attacking open-source LLMs to closed-source LLMs. In addition, it can generate 200 adversarial suffixes for one harmful query in only 4 seconds, rendering it more challenging to defend.

Automated fact checking has gained immense interest to tackle the growing misinformation in the digital era. Existing systems primarily focus on synthetic claims on Wikipedia, and noteworthy progress has also been made on real-world claims. In this work, we release QuanTemp, a diverse, multi-domain dataset focused exclusively on numerical claims, encompassing temporal, statistical and diverse aspects with fine-grained metadata and an evidence collection without leakage. This addresses the challenge of verifying real-world numerical claims, which are complex and often lack precise information, not addressed by existing works that mainly focus on synthetic claims. We evaluate and quantify the limitations of existing solutions for the task of verifying numerical claims. We also evaluate claim decomposition based methods, numerical understanding based models and our best baselines achieves a macro-F1 of 58.32. This demonstrates that QuanTemp serves as a challenging evaluation set for numerical claim verification.

Questions combine our mastery of language with our remarkable facility for reasoning about uncertainty. How do people navigate vast hypothesis spaces to pose informative questions given limited cognitive resources? We study these tradeoffs in a classic grounded question-asking task based on the board game Battleship. Our language-informed program sampling (LIPS) model uses large language models (LLMs) to generate natural language questions, translate them into symbolic programs, and evaluate their expected information gain. We find that with a surprisingly modest resource budget, this simple Monte Carlo optimization strategy yields informative questions that mirror human performance across varied Battleship board scenarios. In contrast, LLM-only baselines struggle to ground questions in the board state; notably, GPT-4V provides no improvement over non-visual baselines. Our results illustrate how Bayesian models of question-asking can leverage the statistics of language to capture human priors, while highlighting some shortcomings of pure LLMs as grounded reasoners.

The prevalence of unwarranted beliefs, spanning pseudoscience, logical fallacies, and conspiracy theories, presents substantial societal hurdles and the risk of disseminating misinformation. Utilizing established psychometric assessments, this study explores the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) vis-a-vis the average human in detecting prevalent logical pitfalls. We undertake a philosophical inquiry, juxtaposing the rationality of humans against that of LLMs. Furthermore, we propose methodologies for harnessing LLMs to counter misconceptions, drawing upon psychological models of persuasion such as cognitive dissonance theory and elaboration likelihood theory. Through this endeavor, we highlight the potential of LLMs as personalized misinformation debunking agents.

Gender bias research has been pivotal in revealing undesirable behaviors in large language models, exposing serious gender stereotypes associated with occupations, and emotions. A key observation in prior work is that models reinforce stereotypes as a consequence of the gendered correlations that are present in the training data. In this paper, we focus on bias where the effect from training data is unclear, and instead address the question: Do language models still exhibit gender bias in non-stereotypical settings? To do so, we introduce UnStereoEval (USE), a novel framework tailored for investigating gender bias in stereotype-free scenarios. USE defines a sentence-level score based on pretraining data statistics to determine if the sentence contain minimal word-gender associations. To systematically benchmark the fairness of popular language models in stereotype-free scenarios, we utilize USE to automatically generate benchmarks without any gender-related language. By leveraging USE's sentence-level score, we also repurpose prior gender bias benchmarks (Winobias and Winogender) for non-stereotypical evaluation. Surprisingly, we find low fairness across all 28 tested models. Concretely, models demonstrate fair behavior in only 9%-41% of stereotype-free sentences, suggesting that bias does not solely stem from the presence of gender-related words. These results raise important questions about where underlying model biases come from and highlight the need for more systematic and comprehensive bias evaluation. We release the full dataset and code at https://ucinlp.github.io/unstereo-eval.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) have become more advanced, they have outpaced our abilities to accurately evaluate their quality. Not only is finding data to adequately probe particular model properties difficult, but evaluating the correctness of a model's freeform generation alone is a challenge. To address this, many evaluations now rely on using LLMs themselves as judges to score the quality of outputs from other LLMs. Evaluations most commonly use a single large model like GPT4. While this method has grown in popularity, it is costly, has been shown to introduce intramodel bias, and in this work, we find that very large models are often unnecessary. We propose instead to evaluate models using a Panel of LLm evaluators (PoLL). Across three distinct judge settings and spanning six different datasets, we find that using a PoLL composed of a larger number of smaller models outperforms a single large judge, exhibits less intra-model bias due to its composition of disjoint model families, and does so while being over seven times less expensive.

This study investigates the robustness of graph embedding methods for community detection in the face of network perturbations, specifically edge deletions. Graph embedding techniques, which represent nodes as low-dimensional vectors, are widely used for various graph machine learning tasks due to their ability to capture structural properties of networks effectively. However, the impact of perturbations on the performance of these methods remains relatively understudied. The research considers state-of-the-art graph embedding methods from two families: matrix factorization (e.g., LE, LLE, HOPE, M-NMF) and random walk-based (e.g., DeepWalk, LINE, node2vec). Through experiments conducted on both synthetic and real-world networks, the study reveals varying degrees of robustness within each family of graph embedding methods. The robustness is found to be influenced by factors such as network size, initial community partition strength, and the type of perturbation. Notably, node2vec and LLE consistently demonstrate higher robustness for community detection across different scenarios, including networks with degree and community size heterogeneity. These findings highlight the importance of selecting an appropriate graph embedding method based on the specific characteristics of the network and the task at hand, particularly in scenarios where robustness to perturbations is crucial.

Causal reasoning is viewed as crucial for achieving human-level machine intelligence. Recent advances in language models have expanded the horizons of artificial intelligence across various domains, sparking inquiries into their potential for causal reasoning. In this work, we introduce Causal evaluation of Language Models (CaLM), which, to the best of our knowledge, is the first comprehensive benchmark for evaluating the causal reasoning capabilities of language models. First, we propose the CaLM framework, which establishes a foundational taxonomy consisting of four modules: causal target (i.e., what to evaluate), adaptation (i.e., how to obtain the results), metric (i.e., how to measure the results), and error (i.e., how to analyze the bad results). This taxonomy defines a broad evaluation design space while systematically selecting criteria and priorities. Second, we compose the CaLM dataset, comprising 126,334 data samples, to provide curated sets of causal targets, adaptations, metrics, and errors, offering extensive coverage for diverse research pursuits. Third, we conduct an extensive evaluation of 28 leading language models on a core set of 92 causal targets, 9 adaptations, 7 metrics, and 12 error types. Fourth, we perform detailed analyses of the evaluation results across various dimensions (e.g., adaptation, scale). Fifth, we present 50 high-level empirical findings across 9 dimensions (e.g., model), providing valuable guidance for future language model development. Finally, we develop a multifaceted platform, including a website, leaderboards, datasets, and toolkits, to support scalable and adaptable assessments. We envision CaLM as an ever-evolving benchmark for the community, systematically updated with new causal targets, adaptations, models, metrics, and error types to reflect ongoing research advancements. Project website is at https://opencausalab.github.io/CaLM.

Restless multi-armed bandits (RMAB) play a central role in modeling sequential decision making problems under an instantaneous activation constraint that at most B arms can be activated at any decision epoch. Each restless arm is endowed with a state that evolves independently according to a Markov decision process regardless of being activated or not. In this paper, we consider the task of learning in episodic RMAB with unknown transition functions and adversarial rewards, which can change arbitrarily across episodes. Further, we consider a challenging but natural bandit feedback setting that only adversarial rewards of activated arms are revealed to the decision maker (DM). The goal of the DM is to maximize its total adversarial rewards during the learning process while the instantaneous activation constraint must be satisfied in each decision epoch. We develop a novel reinforcement learning algorithm with two key contributors: a novel biased adversarial reward estimator to deal with bandit feedback and unknown transitions, and a low-complexity index policy to satisfy the instantaneous activation constraint. We show $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(H\sqrt{T})$ regret bound for our algorithm, where $T$ is the number of episodes and $H$ is the episode length. To our best knowledge, this is the first algorithm to ensure $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ regret for adversarial RMAB in our considered challenging settings.