Misinformation is still a major societal problem and the arrival of Large Language Models (LLMs) only added to it. This paper analyzes synthetic, false, and genuine information in the form of text from spectral analysis, visualization, and explainability perspectives to find the answer to why the problem is still unsolved despite multiple years of research and a plethora of solutions in the literature. Various embedding techniques on multiple datasets are used to represent information for the purpose. The diverse spectral and non-spectral methods used on these embeddings include t-distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE), Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and Variational Autoencoders (VAEs). Classification is done using multiple machine learning algorithms. Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME), SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), and Integrated Gradients are used for the explanation of the classification. The analysis and the explanations generated show that misinformation is quite closely intertwined with genuine information and the machine learning algorithms are not as effective in separating the two despite the claims in the literature.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable abilities in general scenarios. Instruction finetuning empowers them to align with humans in various tasks. Nevertheless, the Diversity and Quality of the instruction data remain two main challenges for instruction finetuning. With regard to this, in this paper, we propose a novel gradient-based method to automatically select high-quality and diverse instruction finetuning data for machine translation. Our key innovation centers around analyzing how individual training examples influence the model during training. Specifically, we select training examples that exert beneficial influences on the model as high-quality ones by means of Influence Function plus a small high-quality seed dataset. Moreover, to enhance the diversity of the training data we maximize the variety of influences they have on the model by clustering on their gradients and resampling. Extensive experiments on WMT22 and FLORES translation tasks demonstrate the superiority of our methods, and in-depth analysis further validates their effectiveness and generalization.

Self-improvement through post-training methods such as iterative preference learning has been acclaimed for enhancing the problem-solving capabilities (e.g., mathematical reasoning) of Large Language Models (LLMs) without human intervention. However, as exploration deepens, it becomes crucial to assess whether these improvements genuinely signify progress in solving more challenging problems or if they could lead to unintended regressions. To address this, we propose a comprehensive evaluative framework that goes beyond the superficial pass@1 metric to scrutinize the underlying enhancements of post-training paradigms for self-improvement. Through rigorous experimentation and analysis across diverse problem-solving tasks, the empirical results point out the phenomenon of \emph{self-improvement reversal}, where models showing improved performance across benchmarks will paradoxically exhibit declines in broader, essential capabilities, like output diversity and out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization. These findings indicate that current self-improvement practices through post-training are inadequate for equipping models to tackle more complex problems. Furthermore, they underscore the necessity of our critical evaluation metrics in discerning the \emph{progress or regress} dichotomy for self-improving LLMs.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in solving math problems, a hallmark of human intelligence. Despite high success rates on current benchmarks; however, these often feature simple problems with only one or two unknowns, which do not sufficiently challenge their reasoning capacities. This paper introduces a novel benchmark, BeyondX, designed to address these limitations by incorporating problems with multiple unknowns. Recognizing the challenges in proposing multi-unknown problems from scratch, we developed BeyondX using an innovative automated pipeline that progressively increases complexity by expanding the number of unknowns in simpler problems. Empirical study on BeyondX reveals that the performance of existing LLMs, even those fine-tuned specifically on math tasks, significantly decreases as the number of unknowns increases - with a performance drop of up to 70\% observed in GPT-4. To tackle these challenges, we propose the Formulate-and-Solve strategy, a generalized prompting approach that effectively handles problems with an arbitrary number of unknowns. Our findings reveal that this strategy not only enhances LLM performance on the BeyondX benchmark but also provides deeper insights into the computational limits of LLMs when faced with more complex mathematical challenges.

Large Language Model (LLMs) such as ChatGPT that exhibit generative AI capabilities are facing accelerated adoption and innovation. The increased presence of Generative AI (GAI) inevitably raises concerns about the risks and safety associated with these models. This article provides an up-to-date survey of recent trends in AI safety research of GAI-LLMs from a computer scientist's perspective: specific and technical. In this survey, we explore the background and motivation for the identified harms and risks in the context of LLMs being generative language models; our survey differentiates by emphasising the need for unified theories of the distinct safety challenges in the research development and applications of LLMs. We start our discussion with a concise introduction to the workings of LLMs, supported by relevant literature. Then we discuss earlier research that has pointed out the fundamental constraints of generative models, or lack of understanding thereof (e.g., performance and safety trade-offs as LLMs scale in number of parameters). We provide a sufficient coverage of LLM alignment -- delving into various approaches, contending methods and present challenges associated with aligning LLMs with human preferences. By highlighting the gaps in the literature and possible implementation oversights, our aim is to create a comprehensive analysis that provides insights for addressing AI safety in LLMs and encourages the development of aligned and secure models. We conclude our survey by discussing future directions of LLMs for AI safety, offering insights into ongoing research in this critical area.

Automatic summarization of legal case judgements, which are known to be long and complex, has traditionally been tried via extractive summarization models. In recent years, generative models including abstractive summarization models and Large language models (LLMs) have gained huge popularity. In this paper, we explore the applicability of such models for legal case judgement summarization. We applied various domain specific abstractive summarization models and general domain LLMs as well as extractive summarization models over two sets of legal case judgements from the United Kingdom (UK) Supreme Court and the Indian (IN) Supreme Court and evaluated the quality of the generated summaries. We also perform experiments on a third dataset of legal documents of a different type, Government reports from the United States (US). Results show that abstractive summarization models and LLMs generally perform better than the extractive methods as per traditional metrics for evaluating summary quality. However, detailed investigation shows the presence of inconsistencies and hallucinations in the outputs of the generative models, and we explore ways to reduce the hallucinations and inconsistencies in the summaries. Overall, the investigation suggests that further improvements are needed to enhance the reliability of abstractive models and LLMs for legal case judgement summarization. At present, a human-in-the-loop technique is more suitable for performing manual checks to identify inconsistencies in the generated summaries.

This study presents a novel two-stage Retrieve-Rank system for automated ICD-10-CM medical coding, comparing its performance against a Vanilla Large Language Model (LLM) approach. Evaluating both systems on a dataset of 100 single-term medical conditions, the Retrieve-Rank system achieved 100% accuracy in predicting correct ICD-10-CM codes, significantly outperforming the Vanilla LLM (GPT-3.5-turbo), which achieved only 6% accuracy. Our analysis demonstrates the Retrieve-Rank system's superior precision in handling various medical terms across different specialties. While these results are promising, we acknowledge the limitations of using simplified inputs and the need for further testing on more complex, realistic medical cases. This research contributes to the ongoing effort to improve the efficiency and accuracy of medical coding, highlighting the importance of retrieval-based approaches.

Question answering (QA) can only make progress if we know if an answer is correct, but for many of the most challenging and interesting QA examples, current efficient answer correctness (AC) metrics do not align with human judgments, particularly verbose, free-form answers from large language models (LLMs). There are two challenges: a lack of diverse evaluation data and that models are too big and non-transparent; LLM-based scorers correlate better with humans, but this expensive task has only been tested on limited QA datasets. We rectify these issues by providing guidelines and datasets for evaluating machine QA adopted from human QA community. We also propose an efficient, low-resource, and interpretable QA evaluation method more stable than an exact match and neural methods.

Using large language models (LLMs) for automatic evaluation has become an important evaluation method in NLP research. However, it is unclear whether these LLM-based evaluators can be applied in real-world classrooms to assess student assignments. This empirical report shares how we use GPT-4 as an automatic assignment evaluator in a university course with 1,028 students. Based on student responses, we find that LLM-based assignment evaluators are generally acceptable to students when students have free access to these LLM-based evaluators. However, students also noted that the LLM sometimes fails to adhere to the evaluation instructions. Additionally, we observe that students can easily manipulate the LLM-based evaluator to output specific strings, allowing them to achieve high scores without meeting the assignment rubric. Based on student feedback and our experience, we provide several recommendations for integrating LLM-based evaluators into future classrooms.

Chain of thought finetuning (cot-finetuning) aims to endow small language models (SLM) with reasoning ability to improve their performance towards specific tasks by allowing them to imitate the reasoning procedure of large language models (LLM) beyond simply predicting the answers. Most existing cot-finetuning methods adopt a pre-thinking mechanism, allowing the SLM to generate a rationale before providing an answer. This mechanism enables SLM to analyze and think about complex questions, but it also makes answer correctness highly sensitive to minor errors in rationale. Therefore, we propose a robust post-thinking mechanism to generate answers before rationale. Thanks to this answer-first setting, 1) the answer can escape from the adverse effects caused by minor errors in the rationale; 2) the rationale serves as an error amplifier to the answer, which makes the SLM focus on learning hard samples; 3) the inferring efficiency can also benefit from the setting since users can stop the generation right after answers are outputted when inference is conducted. However, although the post-thinking mechanism brings many advantages and improves the overall performance of SLM on specific tasks, it may lose the ability to think about the questions and decompose complex questions into simple sub-questions compared to pre-thinking mechanism. Therefore, a plug-and-play adaptive-thinking mechanism is proposed with the aid of the soft prompt tuning to integrate the merits of the pre-thinking mechanism and post-thinking mechanism, in which a perception module is introduced to adaptively prompt SLM answer or think first based on perceiving the complexity of the questions. Extensive experiments are conducted across 12 reasoning tasks and 2 representative language models to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed mechanism.