The escalating challenge of misinformation, particularly in political discourse, requires advanced fact-checking solutions; this is even clearer in the more complex scenario of multimodal claims. We tackle this issue using a multimodal large language model in conjunction with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and introduce two novel reasoning techniques: Chain of RAG (CoRAG) and Tree of RAG (ToRAG). They fact-check multimodal claims by extracting both textual and image content, retrieving external information, and reasoning subsequent questions to be answered based on prior evidence. We achieve a weighted F1-score of 0.85, surpassing a baseline reasoning technique by 0.14 points. Human evaluation confirms that the vast majority of our generated fact-check explanations contain all information from gold standard data.

Human cognition exhibits systematic compositionality, the algebraic ability to generate infinite novel combinations from finite learned components, which is the key to understanding and reasoning about complex logic. In this work, we investigate the compositionality of large language models (LLMs) in mathematical reasoning. Specifically, we construct a new dataset \textsc{MathTrap}\footnotemark[3] by introducing carefully designed logical traps into the problem descriptions of MATH and GSM8k. Since problems with logical flaws are quite rare in the real world, these represent ``unseen'' cases to LLMs. Solving these requires the models to systematically compose (1) the mathematical knowledge involved in the original problems with (2) knowledge related to the introduced traps. Our experiments show that while LLMs possess both components of requisite knowledge, they do not \textbf{spontaneously} combine them to handle these novel cases. We explore several methods to mitigate this deficiency, such as natural language prompts, few-shot demonstrations, and fine-tuning. We find that LLMs' performance can be \textbf{passively} improved through the above external intervention. Overall, systematic compositionality remains an open challenge for large language models.

The advent of conversational agents with increasingly human-like behaviour throws old philosophical questions into new light. Does it, or could it, ever make sense to speak of AI agents built out of generative language models in terms of consciousness, given that they are "mere" simulacra of human behaviour, and that what they do can be seen as "merely" role play? Drawing on the later writings of Wittgenstein, this paper attempts to tackle this question while avoiding the pitfalls of dualistic thinking.

Language models (LMs) derive their capabilities from extensive training on diverse data, including potentially copyrighted material. These models can memorize and generate content similar to their training data, posing potential concerns. Therefore, model creators are motivated to develop mitigation methods that prevent generating protected content. We term this procedure as copyright takedowns for LMs, noting the conceptual similarity to (but legal distinction from) the DMCA takedown This paper introduces the first evaluation of the feasibility and side effects of copyright takedowns for LMs. We propose CoTaEval, an evaluation framework to assess the effectiveness of copyright takedown methods, the impact on the model's ability to retain uncopyrightable factual knowledge from the training data whose recitation is embargoed, and how well the model maintains its general utility and efficiency. We examine several strategies, including adding system prompts, decoding-time filtering interventions, and unlearning approaches. Our findings indicate that no tested method excels across all metrics, showing significant room for research in this unique problem setting and indicating potential unresolved challenges for live policy proposals.

The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has demonstrated promising progress in solving logical reasoning tasks effectively. Several recent approaches have proposed to change the role of the LLM from the reasoner into a translator between natural language statements and symbolic representations which are then sent to external symbolic solvers to resolve. This paradigm has established the current state-of-the-art result in logical reasoning (i.e., deductive reasoning). However, it remains unclear whether the variance in performance of these approaches stems from the methodologies employed or the specific symbolic solvers utilized. There is a lack of consistent comparison between symbolic solvers and how they influence the overall reported performance. This is important, as each symbolic solver also has its own input symbolic language, presenting varying degrees of challenge in the translation process. To address this gap, we perform experiments on 3 deductive reasoning benchmarks with LLMs augmented with widely used symbolic solvers: Z3, Pyke, and Prover9. The tool-executable rates of symbolic translation generated by different LLMs exhibit a near 50% performance variation. This highlights a significant difference in performance rooted in very basic choices of tools. The almost linear correlation between the executable rate of translations and the accuracy of the outcomes from Prover9 highlight a strong alignment between LLMs ability to translate into Prover9 symbolic language, and the correctness of those translations.

The reward model has become increasingly important in alignment, assessment, and data construction for large language models (LLMs). Most existing researchers focus on enhancing reward models through data improvements, following the conventional training framework for reward models that directly optimizes the predicted rewards. In this paper, we propose a hybrid alignment framework HaF-RM for reward model training by introducing an additional constraint on token-level policy probabilities in addition to the reward score. It can simultaneously supervise the internal preference model at the token level and optimize the mapping layer of the reward model at the sequence level. Theoretical justifications and experiment results on five datasets show the validity and effectiveness of our proposed hybrid framework for training a high-quality reward model. By decoupling the reward modeling procedure and incorporating hybrid supervision, our HaF-RM framework offers a principled and effective approach to enhancing the performance and alignment of reward models, a critical component in the responsible development of powerful language models. We release our code at https://haf-rm.github.io.

Despite tremendous advancements, current state-of-the-art Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are still far from perfect. They tend to hallucinate and may generate biased responses. In such circumstances, having a way to assess the reliability of a given response generated by a VLM is quite useful. Existing methods, such as estimating uncertainty using answer likelihoods or prompt-based confidence generation, often suffer from overconfidence. Other methods use self-consistency comparison but are affected by confirmation biases. To alleviate these, we propose \textbf{De}compose and \textbf{C}ompare \textbf{C}onsistency (\texttt{DeCC}) for reliability measurement. By comparing the consistency between the direct answer generated using the VLM's internal reasoning process, and the indirect answers obtained by decomposing the question into sub-questions and reasoning over the sub-answers produced by the VLM, \texttt{DeCC} measures the reliability of VLM's direct answer. Experiments across six vision-language tasks with three VLMs show \texttt{DeCC}'s reliability estimation achieves better correlation with task accuracy compared to the existing methods.

This technical report describes the Time Series Optimized Transformer for Observability (Toto), a new state of the art foundation model for time series forecasting developed by Datadog. In addition to advancing the state of the art on generalized time series benchmarks in domains such as electricity and weather, this model is the first general-purpose time series forecasting foundation model to be specifically tuned for observability metrics. Toto was trained on a dataset of one trillion time series data points, the largest among all currently published time series foundation models. Alongside publicly available time series datasets, 75% of the data used to train Toto consists of fully anonymous numerical metric data points from the Datadog platform. In our experiments, Toto outperforms existing time series foundation models on observability data. It does this while also excelling at general-purpose forecasting tasks, achieving state-of-the-art zero-shot performance on multiple open benchmark datasets.

Large language models, particularly multilingual ones, are designed, claimed, and expected to cater to native speakers of varied languages. We hypothesise that the current practices of fine-tuning and evaluating these models may not perfectly align with this objective owing to a heavy reliance on translation, which can introduce translation artefacts and defects. It remains unknown whether the nature of the instruction data has an impact on the model output; conversely, it is questionable whether translated test sets can capture such nuances. Due to the often coupled practices of using translated data in both stages, such imperfections could have been overlooked. This work investigates these issues using controlled native or translated data during instruction tuning and evaluation stages. Experiments on eight base models and eight different benchmarks show that native or generation benchmarks reveal a notable difference between native and translated instruction data especially when model performance is high, whereas other types of test sets cannot. The comparison between round-trip and single-pass translations reflects the importance of knowledge from language-native resources. Finally, we demonstrate that regularization is beneficial to bridging this gap on structured but not generative tasks.

Large language models (LLM) excel at a variety of natural language processing tasks, yet they struggle to generate personalized content for individuals, particularly in real-world scenarios like scientific writing. Addressing this challenge, we introduce STEP-BACK PROFILING to personalize LLMs by distilling user history into concise profiles, including essential traits and preferences of users. To conduct the experiments, we construct a Personalized Scientific Writing (PSW) dataset to study multi-user personalization. PSW requires the models to write scientific papers given specialized author groups with diverse academic backgrounds. As for the results, we demonstrate the effectiveness of capturing user characteristics via STEP-BACK PROFILING for collaborative writing. Moreover, our approach outperforms the baselines by up to 3.6 points on the general personalization benchmark (LaMP), including 7 personalization LLM tasks. Our ablation studies validate the contributions of different components in our method and provide insights into our task definition. Our dataset and code are available at \url{https://github.com/gersteinlab/step-back-profiling}.