The field of textual adversarial defenses has gained considerable attention in recent years due to the increasing vulnerability of natural language processing (NLP) models to adversarial attacks, which exploit subtle perturbations in input text to deceive models. This paper introduces the Defensive Dual Masking (DDM) algorithm, a novel approach designed to enhance model robustness against such attacks. DDM utilizes a unique adversarial training strategy where [MASK] tokens are strategically inserted into training samples to prepare the model to handle adversarial perturbations more effectively. During inference, potentially adversarial tokens are dynamically replaced with [MASK] tokens to neutralize potential threats while preserving the core semantics of the input. The theoretical foundation of our approach is explored, demonstrating how the selective masking mechanism strengthens the model's ability to identify and mitigate adversarial manipulations. Our empirical evaluation across a diverse set of benchmark datasets and attack mechanisms consistently shows that DDM outperforms state-of-the-art defense techniques, improving model accuracy and robustness. Moreover, when applied to Large Language Models (LLMs), DDM also enhances their resilience to adversarial attacks, providing a scalable defense mechanism for large-scale NLP applications.

Reward Models (RMs) are crucial for aligning language models with human preferences. Currently, the evaluation of RMs depends on measuring accuracy against a validation set of manually annotated preference data. Although this method is straightforward and widely adopted, the relationship between RM accuracy and downstream policy performance remains under-explored. In this work, we conduct experiments in a synthetic setting to investigate how differences in RM measured by accuracy translate into gaps in optimized policy performance. Our findings reveal that while there is a weak positive correlation between accuracy and downstream performance, policies optimized towards RMs with similar accuracy can exhibit quite different performance. Moreover, we discover that the way of measuring accuracy significantly impacts its ability to predict the final policy performance. Through the lens of the Regressional Goodhart effect, we recognize that accuracy, when used for measuring RM quality, can fail to fully capture the potential RM overoptimization. This underscores the inadequacy of relying solely on accuracy to reflect their impact on policy optimization.

Extracting relevant and structured knowledge from large, complex technical documents within the Reliability and Maintainability (RAM) domain is labor-intensive and prone to errors. Our work addresses this challenge by presenting OntoKGen, a genuine pipeline for ontology extraction and Knowledge Graph (KG) generation. OntoKGen leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) through an interactive user interface guided by our adaptive iterative Chain of Thought (CoT) algorithm to ensure that the ontology extraction process and, thus, KG generation align with user-specific requirements. Although KG generation follows a clear, structured path based on the confirmed ontology, there is no universally correct ontology as it is inherently based on the user's preferences. OntoKGen recommends an ontology grounded in best practices, minimizing user effort and providing valuable insights that may have been overlooked, all while giving the user complete control over the final ontology. Having generated the KG based on the confirmed ontology, OntoKGen enables seamless integration into schemeless, non-relational databases like Neo4j. This integration allows for flexible storage and retrieval of knowledge from diverse, unstructured sources, facilitating advanced querying, analysis, and decision-making. Moreover, the generated KG serves as a robust foundation for future integration into Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, offering enhanced capabilities for developing domain-specific intelligent applications.

The advent of Large Language Models (LLM) has reformed the Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR). Prompting LLM with audio embeddings to generate transcriptions becomes the new state-of-the-art ASR. Despite LLMs being trained with an extensive amount of text corpora, high-quality domain-specific text data can still significantly enhance ASR performance on domain adaptation tasks. Although LLM-based ASR can naturally incorporate more text corpora by fine-tuning the LLM decoder, fine-tuning such ASR on text-only data without paired prompts may diminish the effectiveness of domain-specific knowledge. To mitigate this issue, we propose a two-step soft prompt fine-tuning strategy that enhances domain-specific text adaptation. Experimental results show that text adaptation with our proposed method achieved a relative up to 9% Word Error Rate (WER) reduction and up to 18% Entity Error Rate (EER) reduction on the target domain compared to the baseline ASR. Combining this with domain-specific Language Model (LM) fusion can further improve the EER by a relative 2-5%

We address the problem of personalized, interactive text-to-image (T2I) generation, designing a reinforcement learning (RL) agent which iteratively improves a set of generated images for a user through a sequence of prompt expansions. Using human raters, we create a novel dataset of sequential preferences, which we leverage, together with large-scale open-source (non-sequential) datasets. We construct user-preference and user-choice models using an EM strategy and identify varying user preference types. We then leverage a large multimodal language model (LMM) and a value-based RL approach to suggest a personalized and diverse slate of prompt expansions to the user. Our Personalized And Sequential Text-to-image Agent (PASTA) extends T2I models with personalized multi-turn capabilities, fostering collaborative co-creation and addressing uncertainty or underspecification in a user's intent. We evaluate PASTA using human raters, showing significant improvement compared to baseline methods. We also release our sequential rater dataset and simulated user-rater interactions to support future research in personalized, multi-turn T2I generation.

The ability to wield tools was once considered exclusive to human intelligence, but it's now known that many other animals, like crows, possess this capability. Yet, robotic systems still fall short of matching biological dexterity. In this paper, we investigate the use of Large Language Models (LLMs), tool affordances, and object manoeuvrability for non-prehensile tool-based manipulation tasks. Our novel method leverages LLMs based on scene information and natural language instructions to enable symbolic task planning for tool-object manipulation. This approach allows the system to convert the human language sentence into a sequence of feasible motion functions. We have developed a novel manoeuvrability-driven controller using a new tool affordance model derived from visual feedback. This controller helps guide the robot's tool utilization and manipulation actions, even within confined areas, using a stepping incremental approach. The proposed methodology is evaluated with experiments to prove its effectiveness under various manipulation scenarios.

The rapid advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly expanded their applications, ranging from multilingual support to domain-specific tasks and multimodal integration. In this paper, we present OmniEvalKit, a novel benchmarking toolbox designed to evaluate LLMs and their omni-extensions across multilingual, multidomain, and multimodal capabilities. Unlike existing benchmarks that often focus on a single aspect, OmniEvalKit provides a modular, lightweight, and automated evaluation system. It is structured with a modular architecture comprising a Static Builder and Dynamic Data Flow, promoting the seamless integration of new models and datasets. OmniEvalKit supports over 100 LLMs and 50 evaluation datasets, covering comprehensive evaluations across thousands of model-dataset combinations. OmniEvalKit is dedicated to creating an ultra-lightweight and fast-deployable evaluation framework, making downstream applications more convenient and versatile for the AI community.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated notable proficiency in both code generation and comprehension across multiple programming languages. However, the mechanisms underlying this proficiency remain underexplored, particularly with respect to whether distinct programming languages are processed independently or within a shared parametric region. Drawing an analogy to the specialized regions of the brain responsible for distinct cognitive functions, we introduce the concept of Coding Spot, a specialized parametric region within LLMs that facilitates coding capabilities. Our findings identify this Coding Spot and show that targeted modifications to this subset significantly affect performance on coding tasks, while largely preserving non-coding functionalities. This compartmentalization mirrors the functional specialization observed in cognitive neuroscience, where specific brain regions are dedicated to distinct tasks, suggesting that LLMs may similarly employ specialized parameter regions for different knowledge domains.

The technical report introduces O1-CODER, an attempt to replicate OpenAI's o1 model with a focus on coding tasks. It integrates reinforcement learning (RL) and Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to enhance the model's System-2 thinking capabilities. The framework includes training a Test Case Generator (TCG) for standardized code testing, using MCTS to generate code data with reasoning processes, and iteratively fine-tuning the policy model to initially produce pseudocode and then generate the full code. The report also addresses the opportunities and challenges in deploying o1-like models in real-world applications, suggesting transitioning to the System-2 paradigm and highlighting the imperative for world model construction. Updated model progress and experimental results will be reported in subsequent versions. OpenAI recently introduced the o1 model (OpenAI, 2024), which has demonstrated impressive system-2 thinking capabilities. This model represents a significant advancement in AI's ability to perform complex reasoning tasks that require higher-order cognitive functions. Following its release, numerous analysis and replication efforts have emerged, demonstrating the growing interest in reasoning models. Prior to the o1 model, large language models (LLMs) primarily exhibited System-1 capabilities, characterized by fast, intuitive responses.

Artificial intelligence (AI) model creators commonly attach restrictive terms of use to both their models and their outputs. These terms typically prohibit activities ranging from creating competing AI models to spreading disinformation. Often taken at face value, these terms are positioned by companies as key enforceable tools for preventing misuse, particularly in policy dialogs. But are these terms truly meaningful? There are myriad examples where these broad terms are regularly and repeatedly violated. Yet except for some account suspensions on platforms, no model creator has actually tried to enforce these terms with monetary penalties or injunctive relief. This is likely for good reason: we think that the legal enforceability of these licenses is questionable. This Article systematically assesses of the enforceability of AI model terms of use and offers three contributions. First, we pinpoint a key problem: the artifacts that they protect, namely model weights and model outputs, are largely not copyrightable, making it unclear whether there is even anything to be licensed. Second, we examine the problems this creates for other enforcement. Recent doctrinal trends in copyright preemption may further undermine state-law claims, while other legal frameworks like the DMCA and CFAA offer limited recourse. Anti-competitive provisions likely fare even worse than responsible use provisions. Third, we provide recommendations to policymakers. There are compelling reasons for many provisions to be unenforceable: they chill good faith research, constrain competition, and create quasi-copyright ownership where none should exist. There are, of course, downsides: model creators have fewer tools to prevent harmful misuse. But we think the better approach is for statutory provisions, not private fiat, to distinguish between good and bad uses of AI, restricting the latter.