Recently, Profile-based Spoken Language Understanding (SLU) has gained increasing attention, which aims to incorporate various types of supplementary profile information (i.e., Knowledge Graph, User Profile, Context Awareness) to eliminate the prevalent ambiguities in user utterances. However, existing approaches can only separately model different profile information, without considering their interrelationships or excluding irrelevant and conflicting information within them. To address the above issues, we introduce a Heterogeneous Graph Attention Network to perform reasoning across multiple Profile information, called Pro-HAN. Specifically, we design three types of edges, denoted as intra-Pro, inter-Pro, and utterance-Pro, to capture interrelationships among multiple Pros. We establish a new state-of-the-art on the ProSLU dataset, with an improvement of approximately 8% across all three metrics. Further analysis experiments also confirm the effectiveness of our method in modeling multi-source profile information.

Fairness and privacy are two important values machine learning (ML) practitioners often seek to operationalize in models. Fairness aims to reduce model bias for social/demographic sub-groups. Privacy via differential privacy (DP) mechanisms, on the other hand, limits the impact of any individual's training data on the resulting model. The trade-offs between privacy and fairness goals of trustworthy ML pose a challenge to those wishing to address both. We show that DP amplifies gender, racial, and religious bias when fine-tuning large language models (LLMs), producing models more biased than ones fine-tuned without DP. We find the cause of the amplification to be a disparity in convergence of gradients across sub-groups. Through the case of binary gender bias, we demonstrate that Counterfactual Data Augmentation (CDA), a known method for addressing bias, also mitigates bias amplification by DP. As a consequence, DP and CDA together can be used to fine-tune models while maintaining both fairness and privacy.

We explore the AI2050 "hard problems" that block the promise of AI and cause AI risks: (1) developing general capabilities of the systems; (2) assuring the performance of AI systems and their training processes; (3) aligning system goals with human goals; (4) enabling great applications of AI in real life; (5) addressing economic disruptions; (6) ensuring the participation of all; (7) at the same time ensuring socially responsible deployment; (8) addressing any geopolitical disruptions that AI causes; (9) promoting sound governance of the technology; and (10) managing the philosophical disruptions for humans living in the age of AI. For each problem, we outline the area, identify significant recent work, and suggest ways forward. [Note: this paper reviews literature through January 2023.]

While recent Large Language Models (LLMs) have proven useful in answering user queries, they are prone to hallucination, and their responses often lack credibility due to missing references to reliable sources. An intuitive solution to these issues would be to include in-text citations referring to external documents as evidence. While previous works have directly prompted LLMs to generate in-text citations, their performances are far from satisfactory, especially when it comes to smaller LLMs. In this work, we propose an effective training framework using fine-grained rewards to teach LLMs to generate highly supportive and relevant citations, while ensuring the correctness of their responses. We also conduct a systematic analysis of applying these fine-grained rewards to common LLM training strategies, demonstrating its advantage over conventional practices. We conduct extensive experiments on Question Answering (QA) datasets taken from the ALCE benchmark and validate the model's generalizability using EXPERTQA. On LLaMA-2-7B, the incorporation of fine-grained rewards achieves the best performance among the baselines, even surpassing that of GPT-3.5-turbo.

The advent of generative AI images has completely disrupted the art world. Distinguishing AI generated images from human art is a challenging problem whose impact is growing over time. A failure to address this problem allows bad actors to defraud individuals paying a premium for human art and companies whose stated policies forbid AI imagery. It is also critical for content owners to establish copyright, and for model trainers interested in curating training data in order to avoid potential model collapse. There are several different approaches to distinguishing human art from AI images, including classifiers trained by supervised learning, research tools targeting diffusion models, and identification by professional artists using their knowledge of artistic techniques. In this paper, we seek to understand how well these approaches can perform against today's modern generative models in both benign and adversarial settings. We curate real human art across 7 styles, generate matching images from 5 generative models, and apply 8 detectors (5 automated detectors and 3 different human groups including 180 crowdworkers, 4000+ professional artists, and 13 expert artists experienced at detecting AI). Both Hive and expert artists do very well, but make mistakes in different ways (Hive is weaker against adversarial perturbations while Expert artists produce higher false positives). We believe these weaknesses will remain as models continue to evolve, and use our data to demonstrate why a combined team of human and automated detectors provides the best combination of accuracy and robustness.

Planning and/or defending against decentralized info ops can be aided by computational simulations in lieu of ethically-fraught live experiments on social media. In this study, we introduce Diluvsion, an agent-based model for contested information propagation efforts on Twitter-like social media. The model emphasizes a user's belief in an opinion (stance) being impacted by the perception of potentially illusory popular support from constant incoming floods of indirect information, floods that can be cooperatively engineered in an uncoordinated manner by bots as they compete to spread their stances. Our model, which has been validated against real-world data, is an advancement over previous models because we account for engagement metrics in influencing stance adoption, non-social tie spreading of information, neutrality as a stance that can be spread, and themes that are analogous to media's framing effect and are symbiotic with respect to stance propagation. The strengths of the Diluvsion model are demonstrated in simulations of orthodox info ops, e.g., maximizing adoption of one stance; creating echo chambers; inducing polarization; and unorthodox info ops, e.g., simultaneous support of multiple stances as a Trojan horse tactic for the dissemination of a theme.

While textual information significantly enhances the performance of pre-trained language models (PLMs) in knowledge graph completion (KGC), the static and noisy nature of existing corpora collected from Wikipedia articles or synsets definitions often limits the potential of PLM-based KGC models. To surmount these challenges, we introduce the Contextualization Distillation strategy, a versatile plug-in-and-play approach compatible with both discriminative and generative KGC frameworks. Our method begins by instructing large language models (LLMs) to transform compact, structural triplets into context-rich segments. Subsequently, we introduce two tailored auxiliary tasks, reconstruction and contextualization, allowing smaller KGC models to assimilate insights from these enriched triplets. Comprehensive evaluations across diverse datasets and KGC techniques highlight the efficacy and adaptability of our approach, revealing consistent performance enhancements irrespective of underlying pipelines or architectures. Moreover, our analysis makes our method more explainable and provides insight into generating path selection, as well as the choosing of suitable distillation tasks. All the code and data in this work will be released at https://github.com/David-Li0406/Contextulization-Distillation

The conventional discourse on existential risks (x-risks) from AI typically focuses on abrupt, dire events caused by advanced AI systems, particularly those that might achieve or surpass human-level intelligence. These events have severe consequences that either lead to human extinction or irreversibly cripple human civilization to a point beyond recovery. This discourse, however, often neglects the serious possibility of AI x-risks manifesting incrementally through a series of smaller yet interconnected disruptions, gradually crossing critical thresholds over time. This paper contrasts the conventional "decisive AI x-risk hypothesis" with an "accumulative AI x-risk hypothesis." While the former envisions an overt AI takeover pathway, characterized by scenarios like uncontrollable superintelligence, the latter suggests a different causal pathway to existential catastrophes. This involves a gradual accumulation of critical AI-induced threats such as severe vulnerabilities and systemic erosion of econopolitical structures. The accumulative hypothesis suggests a boiling frog scenario where incremental AI risks slowly converge, undermining resilience until a triggering event results in irreversible collapse. Through systems analysis, this paper examines the distinct assumptions differentiating these two hypotheses. It is then argued that the accumulative view reconciles seemingly incompatible perspectives on AI risks. The implications of differentiating between these causal pathways -- the decisive and the accumulative -- for the governance of AI risks as well as long-term AI safety are discussed.

We propose MusicRL, the first music generation system finetuned from human feedback. Appreciation of text-to-music models is particularly subjective since the concept of musicality as well as the specific intention behind a caption are user-dependent (e.g. a caption such as "upbeat work-out music" can map to a retro guitar solo or a techno pop beat). Not only this makes supervised training of such models challenging, but it also calls for integrating continuous human feedback in their post-deployment finetuning. MusicRL is a pretrained autoregressive MusicLM (Agostinelli et al., 2023) model of discrete audio tokens finetuned with reinforcement learning to maximise sequence-level rewards. We design reward functions related specifically to text-adherence and audio quality with the help from selected raters, and use those to finetune MusicLM into MusicRL-R. We deploy MusicLM to users and collect a substantial dataset comprising 300,000 pairwise preferences. Using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), we train MusicRL-U, the first text-to-music model that incorporates human feedback at scale. Human evaluations show that both MusicRL-R and MusicRL-U are preferred to the baseline. Ultimately, MusicRL-RU combines the two approaches and results in the best model according to human raters. Ablation studies shed light on the musical attributes influencing human preferences, indicating that text adherence and quality only account for a part of it. This underscores the prevalence of subjectivity in musical appreciation and calls for further involvement of human listeners in the finetuning of music generation models.

This paper focuses on language change based on shifting social norms, in particular with regard to the debate on language and gender. It is a recurring argument in this debate that language develops "naturally" and that "severe interventions" - such as gender-inclusive language is often claimed to be - in the allegedly "organic" language system are inappropriate and even "dangerous". Such interventions are, however, not unprecedented. Socially motivated processes of language change are neither unusual nor new. We focus in our contribution on one important political-social space in Germany, the German Bundestag. Taking other struggles about language and gender in the plenaries of the Bundestag as a starting point, our article illustrates that language and gender has been a recurring issue in the German Bundestag since the 1980s. We demonstrate how this is reflected in linguistic practices of the Bundestag, by the use of a) designations for gays and lesbians; b) pair forms such as B\"urgerinnen und B\"urger (female and male citizens); and c) female forms of addresses and personal nouns ('Pr\"asidentin' in addition to 'Pr\"asident'). Lastly, we will discuss implications of these earlier language battles for the currently very heated debate about gender-inclusive language, especially regarding new forms with gender symbols like the asterisk or the colon (Lehrer*innen, Lehrer:innen; male*female teachers) which are intended to encompass all gender identities.