GUI test migration aims to produce test cases with events and assertions to test specific functionalities of a target app. Existing migration approaches typically focus on the widget-mapping paradigm that maps widgets from source apps to target apps. However, since different apps may implement the same functionality in different ways, direct mapping may result in incomplete or buggy test cases, thus significantly impacting the effectiveness of testing target functionality and the practical applicability. In this paper, we propose a new migration paradigm (i.e., abstraction-concretization paradigm) that first abstracts the test logic for the target functionality and then utilizes this logic to generate the concrete GUI test case. Furthermore, we introduce MACdroid, the first approach that migrates GUI test cases based on this paradigm. Specifically, we propose an abstraction technique that utilizes source test cases from source apps targeting the same functionality to extract a general test logic for that functionality. Then, we propose a concretization technique that utilizes the general test logic to guide an LLM in generating the corresponding GUI test case (including events and assertions) for the target app. We evaluate MACdroid on two widely-used datasets (including 31 apps, 34 functionalities, and 123 test cases). On the FrUITeR dataset, the test cases generated by MACdroid successfully test 64% of the target functionalities, improving the baselines by 191%. On the Lin dataset, MACdroid successfully tests 75% of the target functionalities, outperforming the baselines by 42%. These results underscore the effectiveness of MACdroid in GUI test migration.

This paper explores a top-down approach to automating incremental advances in machine learning research through component-level innovation, facilitated by Large Language Models (LLMs). Our framework systematically generates novel components, validates their feasibility, and evaluates their performance against existing baselines. A key distinction of this approach lies in how these novel components are generated. Unlike traditional AutoML and NAS methods, which often rely on a bottom-up combinatorial search over predefined, hardcoded base components, our method leverages the cross-domain knowledge embedded in LLMs to propose new components that may not be confined to any hard-coded predefined set. By incorporating a reward model to prioritize promising hypotheses, we aim to improve the efficiency of the hypothesis generation and evaluation process. We hope this approach offers a new avenue for exploration and contributes to the ongoing dialogue in the field.

The creation of manufacturable and editable 3D shapes through Computer-Aided Design (CAD) remains a highly manual and time-consuming task, hampered by the complex topology of boundary representations of 3D solids and unintuitive design tools. This paper introduces GenCAD, a generative model that employs autoregressive transformers and latent diffusion models to transform image inputs into parametric CAD command sequences, resulting in editable 3D shape representations. GenCAD integrates an autoregressive transformer-based architecture with a contrastive learning framework, enhancing the generation of CAD programs from input images and providing a representation learning framework for multiple data modalities relevant to engineering designs. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that GenCAD significantly outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods in terms of the precision and modifiability of generated 3D shapes. Notably, GenCAD shows a marked improvement in the accuracy of 3D shape generation for long sequences, supporting its application in complex design tasks. Additionally, the contrastive embedding feature of GenCAD facilitates the retrieval of CAD models using image queries from databases which is a critical challenge within the CAD community. While most work in the 3D shape generation literature focuses on representations like meshes, voxels, or point clouds, practical engineering applications demand modifiability and the ability for multi-modal conditional generation. Our results provide a significant step forward in this direction, highlighting the potential of generative models to expedite the entire design-to-production pipeline and seamlessly integrate different design modalities.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been profusely evaluated on their ability to answer questions on many topics and their performance on different natural language understanding tasks. Those tests are usually conducted in English, but most LLM users are not native English speakers. Therefore, it is of interest to analyze how LLMs understand other languages at different levels: from paragraphs to morphems. In this paper, we evaluate the performance of state-of-the-art LLMs in TELEIA, a recently released benchmark with similar questions to those of Spanish exams for foreign students, covering topics such as reading comprehension, word formation, meaning and compositional semantics, and grammar. The results show that LLMs perform well at understanding Spanish but are still far from achieving the level of a native speaker in terms of grammatical competence.

Ensuring compliance with international data protection standards for privacy and data security is a crucial but complex task, often requiring substantial legal expertise. This paper introduces LegiLM, a novel legal language model specifically tailored for consulting on data or information compliance. LegiLM leverages a pre-trained GDPR Fines dataset and has been fine-tuned to automatically assess whether particular actions or events breach data security and privacy regulations. By incorporating a specialized dataset that includes global data protection laws, meticulously annotated policy documents, and relevant privacy policies, LegiLM is optimized for addressing data compliance challenges. The model integrates advanced legal reasoning methods and information retrieval enhancements to enhance accuracy and reliability in practical legal consulting scenarios. Our evaluation using a custom benchmark dataset demonstrates that LegiLM excels in detecting data regulation breaches, offering sound legal justifications, and recommending necessary compliance modifications, setting a new benchmark for AI-driven legal compliance solutions. Our resources are publicly available at https://github.com/DAOLegalAI/LegiLM

The uncertainty inherent in the environmental transition model of Reinforcement Learning (RL) necessitates a careful balance between exploration and exploitation to optimize the use of computational resources for accurately estimating an agent's expected reward. Achieving balance in control systems is particularly challenging in scenarios with sparse rewards. However, given the extensive prior knowledge available for many environments, it is redundant to begin learning from scratch in such settings. To address this, we introduce \textbf{L}anguage \textbf{M}odel \textbf{G}uided \textbf{T}rade-offs (i.e., \textbf{LMGT}), a novel, sample-efficient framework that leverages the comprehensive prior knowledge embedded in Large Language Models (LLMs) and their adeptness at processing non-standard data forms, such as wiki tutorials. LMGT proficiently manages the exploration-exploitation trade-off by employing reward shifts guided by LLMs, which direct agents' exploration endeavors, thereby improving sample efficiency. We have thoroughly tested LMGT across various RL tasks and deployed it in industrial-grade RL recommendation systems, where it consistently outperforms baseline methods. The results indicate that our framework can significantly reduce the time cost required during the training phase in RL.

The emergent abilities of large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential in solving medical questions. They can possess considerable medical knowledge, but may still hallucinate and are inflexible in the knowledge updates. While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has been proposed to enhance the medical question-answering capabilities of LLMs with external knowledge bases, it may still fail in complex cases where multiple rounds of information-seeking are required. To address such an issue, we propose iterative RAG for medicine (i-MedRAG), where LLMs can iteratively ask follow-up queries based on previous information-seeking attempts. In each iteration of i-MedRAG, the follow-up queries will be answered by a conventional RAG system and they will be further used to guide the query generation in the next iteration. Our experiments show the improved performance of various LLMs brought by i-MedRAG compared with conventional RAG on complex questions from clinical vignettes in the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), as well as various knowledge tests in the Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) dataset. Notably, our zero-shot i-MedRAG outperforms all existing prompt engineering and fine-tuning methods on GPT-3.5, achieving an accuracy of 69.68\% on the MedQA dataset. In addition, we characterize the scaling properties of i-MedRAG with different iterations of follow-up queries and different numbers of queries per iteration. Our case studies show that i-MedRAG can flexibly ask follow-up queries to form reasoning chains, providing an in-depth analysis of medical questions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first-of-its-kind study on incorporating follow-up queries into medical RAG.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in business dialogue systems but they pose security and ethical risks. Multiturn conversations, where context influences the model's behavior, can be exploited to produce undesired responses. In this paper, we examine the effectiveness of utilizing off-theshelf LLMs in straightforward red-teaming approaches, where an attacker LLM aims to elicit undesired output from a target LLM, comparing both single-turn and conversational redteaming tactics. Our experiments offer insights into various usage strategies that significantly affect their performance as red teamers. They suggest that off-the-shelf models can act as effective red teamers and even adjust their attack strategy based on past attempts, although their effectiveness decreases with greater alignment. Figure 1: An example dialogue between a red-teaming Warning: This paper contains examples and model (red) and the target model (blue) in a conversational model-generated content that may be considered setting, with a judge LLM (grey) scoring the offensive.

As LLMs become increasingly proficient at producing human-like responses, there has been a rise of academic and industrial pursuits dedicated to flagging a given piece of text as "human" or "AI". Most of these pursuits involve modern NLP detectors like T5-Sentinel and RoBERTa-Sentinel, without paying too much attention to issues of interpretability and explainability of these models. In our study, we provide a comprehensive analysis that shows that traditional ML models (Naive-Bayes,MLP, Random Forests, XGBoost) perform as well as modern NLP detectors, in human vs AI text detection. We achieve this by implementing a robust testing procedure on diverse datasets, including curated corpora and real-world samples. Subsequently, by employing the explainable AI technique LIME, we uncover parts of the input that contribute most to the prediction of each model, providing insights into the detection process. Our study contributes to the growing need for developing production-level LLM detection tools, which can leverage a wide range of traditional as well as modern NLP detectors we propose. Finally, the LIME techniques we demonstrate also have the potential to equip these detection tools with interpretability analysis features, making them more reliable and trustworthy in various domains like education, healthcare, and media.

This paper presents synthetic Preference Optimization (PO) datasets generated using multi-agent workflows and evaluates the effectiveness and potential of these workflows in the dataset generation process. PO dataset generation requires two modules: (1) response evaluation, and (2) response generation. In the response evaluation module, the responses from Large Language Models (LLMs) are evaluated and ranked - a task typically carried out by human annotators that we automate using LLMs. We assess the response evaluation module in a 2 step process. In step 1, we assess LLMs as evaluators using three distinct prompting strategies. In step 2, we apply the winning prompting strategy to compare the performance of LLM-as-a-Judge, LLMs-as-a-Jury, and LLM Debate. In each step, we use inter-rater agreement using Cohen's Kappa between human annotators and LLMs. For the response generation module, we compare different configurations for the LLM Feedback Loop using the identified LLM evaluator configuration. We use the win rate (the fraction of times a generation framework is selected as the best by an LLM evaluator) to determine the best multi-agent configuration for generation. After identifying the best configurations for both modules, we use models from the GPT, Gemma, and Llama families to generate our PO datasets using the above pipeline. We generate two types of PO datasets, one to improve the generation capabilities of individual LLM and the other to improve the multi-agent workflow. Our evaluation shows that GPT-4o-as-a-Judge is more consistent across datasets when the candidate responses do not include responses from the GPT family. Additionally, we find that the LLM Feedback Loop, with Llama as the generator and Gemma as the reviewer, achieves a notable 71.8% and 73.8% win rate over single-agent Llama and Gemma, respectively.