Recent advancements in integrating external tools with Large Language Models (LLMs) have opened new frontiers, with applications in mathematical reasoning, code generators, and smart assistants. However, existing methods, relying on simple one-time retrieval strategies, fall short on effectively and accurately shortlisting relevant tools. This paper introduces a novel PLUTO (Planning, Learning, and Understanding for TOols) approach, encompassing `Plan-and-Retrieve (P&R)` and `Edit-and-Ground (E&G)` paradigms. The P&R paradigm consists of a neural retrieval module for shortlisting relevant tools and an LLM-based query planner that decomposes complex queries into actionable tasks, enhancing the effectiveness of tool utilization. The E&G paradigm utilizes LLMs to enrich tool descriptions based on user scenarios, bridging the gap between user queries and tool functionalities. Experiment results demonstrate that these paradigms significantly improve the recall and NDCG in tool retrieval tasks, significantly surpassing current state-of-the-art models.

By leveraging the retrieval of information from external knowledge databases, Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit enhanced capabilities for accomplishing many knowledge-intensive tasks. However, due to the inherent flaws of current retrieval systems, there might exist irrelevant information within those retrieving top-ranked passages. In this work, we present a comprehensive investigation into the robustness of LLMs to different types of irrelevant information under various conditions. We initially introduce a framework to construct high-quality irrelevant information that ranges from semantically unrelated, partially related, and related to questions. Furthermore, our analysis demonstrates that the constructed irrelevant information not only scores highly on similarity metrics, being highly retrieved by existing systems, but also bears semantic connections to the context. Our investigation reveals that current LLMs still face challenges in discriminating highly semantically related information and can be easily distracted by these irrelevant yet misleading contents. Besides, we also find that current solutions for handling irrelevant information have limitations in improving the robustness of LLMs to such distractions.

As synthetic media becomes progressively more realistic and barriers to using it continue to lower, the technology has been increasingly utilized for malicious purposes, from financial fraud to nonconsensual pornography. Today, the principal defense against being misled by synthetic media relies on the ability of the human observer to visually and auditorily discern between real and fake. However, it remains unclear just how vulnerable people actually are to deceptive synthetic media in the course of their day to day lives. We conducted a perceptual study with 1276 participants to assess how accurate people were at distinguishing synthetic images, audio only, video only, and audiovisual stimuli from authentic. To reflect the circumstances under which people would likely encounter synthetic media in the wild, testing conditions and stimuli emulated a typical online platform, while all synthetic media used in the survey was sourced from publicly accessible generative AI technology. We find that overall, participants struggled to meaningfully discern between synthetic and authentic content. We also find that detection performance worsens when the stimuli contains synthetic content as compared to authentic content, images featuring human faces as compared to non face objects, a single modality as compared to multimodal stimuli, mixed authenticity as compared to being fully synthetic for audiovisual stimuli, and features foreign languages as compared to languages the observer is fluent in. Finally, we also find that prior knowledge of synthetic media does not meaningfully impact their detection performance. Collectively, these results indicate that people are highly susceptible to being tricked by synthetic media in their daily lives and that human perceptual detection capabilities can no longer be relied upon as an effective counterdefense.

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate an impressive capacity to recall a vast range of common factual knowledge information. However, unravelling the underlying reasoning of LLMs and explaining their internal mechanisms of exploiting this factual knowledge remain active areas of investigation. Our work analyzes the factual knowledge encoded in the latent representation of LLMs when prompted to assess the truthfulness of factual claims. We propose an end-to-end framework that jointly decodes the factual knowledge embedded in the latent space of LLMs from a vector space to a set of ground predicates and represents its evolution across the layers using a temporal knowledge graph. Our framework relies on the technique of activation patching which intervenes in the inference computation of a model by dynamically altering its latent representations. Consequently, we neither rely on external models nor training processes. We showcase our framework with local and global interpretability analyses using two claim verification datasets: FEVER and CLIMATE-FEVER. The local interpretability analysis exposes different latent errors from representation to multi-hop reasoning errors. On the other hand, the global analysis uncovered patterns in the underlying evolution of the model's factual knowledge (e.g., store-and-seek factual information). By enabling graph-based analyses of the latent representations, this work represents a step towards the mechanistic interpretability of LLMs.

We introduce a novel framework, LM-Guided CoT, that leverages a lightweight (i.e., <1B) language model (LM) for guiding a black-box large (i.e., >10B) LM in reasoning tasks. Specifically, the lightweight LM first generates a rationale for each input instance. The Frozen large LM is then prompted to predict a task output based on the rationale generated by the lightweight LM. Our approach is resource-efficient in the sense that it only requires training the lightweight LM. We optimize the model through 1) knowledge distillation and 2) reinforcement learning from rationale-oriented and task-oriented reward signals. We assess our method with multi-hop extractive question answering (QA) benchmarks, HotpotQA, and 2WikiMultiHopQA. Experimental results show that our approach outperforms all baselines regarding answer prediction accuracy. We also find that reinforcement learning helps the model to produce higher-quality rationales with improved QA performance.

With the rise of computational social science, many scholars utilize data analysis and natural language processing tools to analyze social media, news articles, and other accessible data sources for examining political and social discourse. Particularly, the study of the emergence of echo-chambers due to the dissemination of specific information has become a topic of interest in mixed methods research areas. In this paper, we analyze data collected from two news portals, Breitbart News (BN) and New York Times (NYT) to prove the hypothesis that the formation of echo-chambers can be partially explained on the level of an individual information consumption rather than a collective topology of individuals' social networks. Our research findings are presented through knowledge graphs, utilizing a dataset spanning 11.5 years gathered from BN and NYT media portals. We demonstrate that the application of knowledge representation techniques to the aforementioned news streams highlights, contrary to common assumptions, shows relative "internal" neutrality of both sources and polarizing attitude towards a small fraction of entities. Additionally, we argue that such characteristics in information sources lead to fundamental disparities in audience worldviews, potentially acting as a catalyst for the formation of echo-chambers.

Abstractive summarization for long-form narrative texts such as movie scripts is challenging due to the computational and memory constraints of current language models. A movie script typically comprises a large number of scenes; however, only a fraction of these scenes are salient, i.e., important for understanding the overall narrative. The salience of a scene can be operationalized by considering it as salient if it is mentioned in the summary. Automatically identifying salient scenes is difficult due to the lack of suitable datasets. In this work, we introduce a scene saliency dataset that consists of human-annotated salient scenes for 100 movies. We propose a two-stage abstractive summarization approach which first identifies the salient scenes in script and then generates a summary using only those scenes. Using QA-based evaluation, we show that our model outperforms previous state-of-the-art summarization methods and reflects the information content of a movie more accurately than a model that takes the whole movie script as input.

The widespread adoption and transformative effects of large language models (LLMs) have sparked concerns regarding their capacity to produce inaccurate and fictitious content, referred to as `hallucinations'. Given the potential risks associated with hallucinations, humans should be able to identify them. This research aims to understand the human perception of LLM hallucinations by systematically varying the degree of hallucination (genuine, minor hallucination, major hallucination) and examining its interaction with warning (i.e., a warning of potential inaccuracies: absent vs. present). Participants (N=419) from Prolific rated the perceived accuracy and engaged with content (e.g., like, dislike, share) in a Q/A format. Results indicate that humans rank content as truthful in the order genuine > minor hallucination > major hallucination and user engagement behaviors mirror this pattern. More importantly, we observed that warning improves hallucination detection without significantly affecting the perceived truthfulness of genuine content. We conclude by offering insights for future tools to aid human detection of hallucinations.

For humans to trust the fluent generations of large language models (LLMs), they must be able to verify their correctness against trusted, external sources. Recent efforts aim to increase verifiability through citations of retrieved documents or post-hoc provenance. However, such citations are prone to mistakes that further complicate their verifiability. To address these limitations, we tackle the verifiability goal with a different philosophy: we trivialize the verification process by developing models that quote verbatim statements from trusted sources in pre-training data. We propose Quote-Tuning, which demonstrates the feasibility of aligning LLMs to leverage memorized information and quote from pre-training data. Quote-Tuning quantifies quoting against large corpora with efficient membership inference tools, and uses the amount of quotes as an implicit reward signal to construct a synthetic preference dataset for quoting, without any human annotation. Next, the target model is aligned to quote using preference optimization algorithms. Experimental results show that Quote-Tuning significantly increases the percentage of LLM generation quoted verbatim from high-quality pre-training documents by 55% to 130% relative to untuned models while maintaining response quality. Further experiments demonstrate that Quote-Tuning generalizes quoting to out-of-domain data, is applicable in different tasks, and provides additional benefits to truthfulness. Quote-Tuning not only serves as a hassle-free method to increase quoting but also opens up avenues for improving LLM trustworthiness through better verifiability.

Music plays a huge part in shaping peoples' psychology and behavioral patterns. This paper investigates the connection between national anthems and different global indices with computational music analysis and statistical correlation analysis. We analyze national anthem musical data to determine whether certain musical characteristics are associated with peace, happiness, suicide rate, crime rate, etc. To achieve this, we collect national anthems from 169 countries and use computational music analysis techniques to extract pitch, tempo, beat, and other pertinent audio features. We then compare these musical characteristics with data on different global indices to ascertain whether a significant correlation exists. Our findings indicate that there may be a correlation between the musical characteristics of national anthems and the indices we investigated. The implications of our findings for music psychology and policymakers interested in promoting social well-being are discussed. This paper emphasizes the potential of musical data analysis in social research and offers a novel perspective on the relationship between music and social indices. The source code and data are made open-access for reproducibility and future research endeavors. It can be accessed at http://bit.ly/na_code.