Large Language Models (LLMs) possess the potential to exert substantial influence on public perceptions and interactions with information. This raises concerns about the societal impact that could arise if the ideologies within these models can be easily manipulated. In this work, we investigate how effectively LLMs can learn and generalize ideological biases from their instruction-tuning data. Our findings reveal a concerning vulnerability: exposure to only a small amount of ideologically driven samples significantly alters the ideology of LLMs. Notably, LLMs demonstrate a startling ability to absorb ideology from one topic and generalize it to even unrelated ones. The ease with which LLMs' ideologies can be skewed underscores the risks associated with intentionally poisoned training data by malicious actors or inadvertently introduced biases by data annotators. It also emphasizes the imperative for robust safeguards to mitigate the influence of ideological manipulations on LLMs.

Recent advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning have demonstrated transformative capabilities across diverse domains. This progress extends to the field of patent analysis and innovation, where AI-based tools present opportunities to streamline and enhance important tasks in the patent cycle such as classification, retrieval, and valuation prediction. This not only accelerates the efficiency of patent researchers and applicants but also opens new avenues for technological innovation and discovery. Our survey provides a comprehensive summary of recent AI tools in patent analysis from more than 40 papers from 26 venues between 2017 and 2023. Unlike existing surveys, we include methods that work for patent image and text data. Furthermore, we introduce a novel taxonomy for the categorization based on the tasks in the patent life cycle as well as the specifics of the AI methods. This interdisciplinary survey aims to serve as a resource for researchers and practitioners who are working at the intersection of AI and patent analysis as well as the patent offices that are aiming to build efficient patent systems.

Pairwise evaluation using large language models (LLMs) is widely used for evaluating natural language generation (NLG) tasks. However, the reliability of LLMs is often compromised by biases, such as favoring verbosity and authoritative tone. In the study, we focus on the comparison of two LLM-based evaluation approaches, pointwise and pairwise. Our findings demonstrate that pointwise evaluators exhibit more robustness against undesirable preferences. Further analysis reveals that pairwise evaluators can accurately identify the shortcomings of low-quality outputs even when their judgment is incorrect. These results indicate that LLMs are more severely influenced by their bias in a pairwise evaluation setup. To mitigate this, we propose a hybrid method that integrates pointwise reasoning into pairwise evaluation. Experimental results show that our method enhances the robustness of pairwise evaluators against adversarial samples while preserving accuracy on normal samples.

Rationality is the quality of being guided by reason, characterized by logical thinking and decision-making that align with evidence and logical rules. This quality is essential for effective problem-solving, as it ensures that solutions are well-founded and systematically derived. Despite the advancements of large language models (LLMs) in generating human-like text with remarkable accuracy, they present biases inherited from the training data, inconsistency across different contexts, and difficulty understanding complex scenarios involving multiple layers of context. Therefore, recent research attempts to leverage the strength of multiple agents working collaboratively with various types of data and tools for enhanced consistency and reliability. To that end, this paper aims to understand whether multi-modal and multi-agent systems are advancing toward rationality by surveying the state-of-the-art works, identifying advancements over single-agent and single-modal systems in terms of rationality, and discussing open problems and future directions. We maintain an open repository at https://github.com/bowen-upenn/MMMA_Rationality.

Large language models (LLMs) face issues in handling factual knowledge, making it vital to evaluate their true ability to understand facts. In this study, we introduce knowledge probing frameworks, BELIEF(-ICL), to evaluate the knowledge understanding ability of not only encoder-based PLMs but also decoder-based PLMs from diverse perspectives. BELIEFs utilize a multi-prompt dataset to evaluate PLM's accuracy, consistency, and reliability in factual knowledge understanding. To provide a more reliable evaluation with BELIEFs, we semi-automatically create MyriadLAMA, which has more diverse prompts than existing datasets. We validate the effectiveness of BELIEFs in correctly and comprehensively evaluating PLM's factual understanding ability through extensive evaluations. We further investigate key factors in learning facts in LLMs, and reveal the limitation of the prompt-based knowledge probing. The dataset is anonymously publicized.

Instruction-following large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, have become increasingly popular with the general audience, many of whom are incorporating them into their daily routines. However, these LLMs inadvertently disclose personal or copyrighted information, which calls for a machine unlearning method to remove selective knowledge. Previous attempts sought to forget the link between the target information and its associated entities, but it rather led to generating undesirable responses about the target, compromising the end-user experience. In this work, we propose SNAP, an innovative framework designed to selectively unlearn information by 1) training an LLM with negative instructions to generate obliterated responses, 2) augmenting hard positives to retain the original LLM performance, and 3) applying the novel Wasserstein regularization to ensure adequate deviation from the initial weights of the LLM. We evaluate our framework on various NLP benchmarks and demonstrate that our approach retains the original LLM capabilities, while successfully unlearning the specified information.

The probabilistic interpretation of Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA) for learning low-dimensional real vectors, called as latent variables, has been exploited immensely in various fields. This study takes a step further by demonstrating the potential of CCA in discovering a latent state that captures the contextual information within the textual data under a two-view setting. The interpretation of CCA discussed in this study utilizes the multi-view nature of textual data, i.e. the consecutive sentences in a document or turns in a dyadic conversation, and has a strong theoretical foundation. Furthermore, this study proposes a model using CCA to perform the Automatic Short Answer Grading (ASAG) task. The empirical analysis confirms that the proposed model delivers competitive results and can even beat various sophisticated supervised techniques. The model is simple, linear, and adaptable and should be used as the baseline especially when labeled training data is scarce or nonexistent.

The rapid development of Large Language Models (LLMs) in vertical domains, including intellectual property (IP), lacks a specific evaluation benchmark for assessing their understanding, application, and reasoning abilities. To fill this gap, we introduce IPEval, the first evaluation benchmark tailored for IP agency and consulting tasks. IPEval comprises 2657 multiple-choice questions across four major dimensions: creation, application, protection, and management of IP. These questions span patent rights (inventions, utility models, designs), trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, and other related laws. Evaluation methods include zero-shot, 5-few-shot, and Chain of Thought (CoT) for seven LLM types, predominantly in English or Chinese. Results show superior English performance by models like GPT series and Qwen series, while Chinese-centric LLMs excel in Chinese tests, albeit specialized IP LLMs lag behind general-purpose ones. Regional and temporal aspects of IP underscore the need for LLMs to grasp legal nuances and evolving laws. IPEval aims to accurately gauge LLM capabilities in IP and spur development of specialized models. Website: \url{https://ipeval.github.io/}

With the increasing role of Natural Language Processing (NLP) in various applications, challenges concerning bias and stereotype perpetuation are accentuated, which often leads to hate speech and harm. Despite existing studies on sexism and misogyny, issues like homophobia and transphobia remain underexplored and often adopt binary perspectives, putting the safety of LGBTQIA+ individuals at high risk in online spaces. In this paper, we assess the potential harm caused by sentence completions generated by English large language models (LLMs) concerning LGBTQIA+ individuals. This is achieved using QueerBench, our new assessment framework, which employs a template-based approach and a Masked Language Modeling (MLM) task. The analysis indicates that large language models tend to exhibit discriminatory behaviour more frequently towards individuals within the LGBTQIA+ community, reaching a difference gap of 7.2% in the QueerBench score of harmfulness.

Despite their remarkable successes, state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs), including vision-and-language models (VLMs) and unimodal language models (ULMs), fail to understand precise semantics. For example, semantically equivalent sentences expressed using different lexical compositions elicit diverging representations. The degree of this divergence and its impact on encoded semantics is not very well understood. In this paper, we introduce the SUGARCREPE++ dataset to analyze the sensitivity of VLMs and ULMs to lexical and semantic alterations. Each sample in SUGARCREPE++ dataset consists of an image and a corresponding triplet of captions: a pair of semantically equivalent but lexically different positive captions and one hard negative caption. This poses a 3-way semantic (in)equivalence problem to the language models. We comprehensively evaluate VLMs and ULMs that differ in architecture, pre-training objectives and datasets to benchmark the performance of SUGARCREPE++ dataset. Experimental results highlight the difficulties of VLMs in distinguishing between lexical and semantic variations, particularly in object attributes and spatial relations. Although VLMs with larger pre-training datasets, model sizes, and multiple pre-training objectives achieve better performance on SUGARCREPE++, there is a significant opportunity for improvement. We show that all the models which achieve better performance on compositionality datasets need not perform equally well on SUGARCREPE++, signifying that compositionality alone may not be sufficient for understanding semantic and lexical alterations. Given the importance of the property that the SUGARCREPE++ dataset targets, it serves as a new challenge to the vision-and-language community.