Questions are essential tools for acquiring the necessary information to complete information-seeking tasks. However, large language models (LLMs), especially open-source models, often perform poorly in generating informative questions, as measured by expected information gain (EIG). In this paper, we propose a method to enhance the informativeness of LLM-generated questions in 20-question game dialogues. We sample multiple questions from the same model (LLAMA 2-CHAT 7B) for each game and create pairs of low-EIG and high-EIG questions to apply a Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) algorithm. Our results show that this method produces more effective questions (in terms of EIG), even in domains different from those used to train the DPO model.

Many empirical studies of labor market questions rely on estimating relatively simple predictive models using small, carefully constructed longitudinal survey datasets based on hand-engineered features. Large Language Models (LLMs), trained on massive datasets, encode vast quantities of world knowledge and can be used for the next job prediction problem. However, while an off-the-shelf LLM produces plausible career trajectories when prompted, the probability with which an LLM predicts a particular job transition conditional on career history will not, in general, align with the true conditional probability in a given population. Recently, Vafa et al. (2024) introduced a transformer-based "foundation model", CAREER, trained using a large, unrepresentative resume dataset, that predicts transitions between jobs; it further demonstrated how transfer learning techniques can be used to leverage the foundation model to build better predictive models of both transitions and wages that reflect conditional transition probabilities found in nationally representative survey datasets. This paper considers an alternative where the fine-tuning of the CAREER foundation model is replaced by fine-tuning LLMs. For the task of next job prediction, we demonstrate that models trained with our approach outperform several alternatives in terms of predictive performance on the survey data, including traditional econometric models, CAREER, and LLMs with in-context learning, even though the LLM can in principle predict job titles that are not allowed in the survey data. Further, we show that our fine-tuned LLM-based models' predictions are more representative of the career trajectories of various workforce subpopulations than off-the-shelf LLM models and CAREER. We conduct experiments and analyses that highlight the sources of the gains in the performance of our models for representative predictions.

With the rapid development of large language models (LLM), the evaluation of LLM becomes increasingly important. Measuring text generation tasks such as summarization and article creation is very difficult. Especially in specific application domains (e.g., to-business or to-customer service), in-house evaluation criteria have to meet not only general standards (correctness, helpfulness and creativity, etc.) but also specific needs of customers and business security requirements at the same time, making the evaluation more difficult. So far, the evaluation of LLM in business scenarios has mainly relied on manual, which is expensive and time-consuming. In this paper, we propose a model-based evaluation method: TALEC, which allows users to flexibly set their own evaluation criteria, and uses in-context learning (ICL) to teach judge model these in-house criteria. In addition, we try combining zero-shot and few-shot to make the judge model focus on more information. We also propose a prompt paradigm and an engineering approach to adjust and iterate the shots ,helping judge model to better understand the complex criteria. We then compare fine-tuning with ICL, finding that fine-tuning can be replaced by ICL. TALEC demonstrates a strong capability to accurately reflect human preferences and achieves a correlation of over 80% with human judgments, outperforming even the inter-human correlation in some tasks. The code is released in https://github.com/zlkqz/auto_eval

Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized AI systems by enabling communication with machines using natural language. Recent developments in Generative AI (GenAI) like Vision-Language Models (GPT-4V) and Gemini have shown great promise in using LLMs as multimodal systems. This new research line results in building Generative AI systems, GenAISys for short, that are capable of multimodal processing and content creation, as well as decision-making. GenAISys use natural language as a communication means and modality encoders as I/O interfaces for processing various data sources. They are also equipped with databases and external specialized tools, communicating with the system through a module for information retrieval and storage. This paper aims to explore and state new research directions in Generative AI Systems, including how to design GenAISys (compositionality, reliability, verifiability), build and train them, and what can be learned from the system-based perspective. Cross-disciplinary approaches are needed to answer open questions about the inner workings of GenAI systems.

Recently, large language models (LLMs) have expanded into various domains. However, there remains a need to evaluate how these models perform when prompted with commonplace queries compared to domain-specific queries, which may be useful for benchmarking prior to fine-tuning domain-specific downstream tasks. This study evaluates LLMs, specifically Gemma-2B and Gemma-7B, across diverse domains, including cybersecurity, medicine, and finance, compared to common knowledge queries. This study employs a comprehensive methodology to evaluate foundational models, encompassing problem formulation, data analysis, and the development of novel outlier detection techniques. This methodological rigor enhances the credibility of the presented evaluation frameworks. This study focused on assessing inference time, response length, throughput, quality, and resource utilization and investigated the correlations between these factors. The results indicate that model size and types of prompts used for inference significantly influenced response length and quality. In addition, common prompts, which include various types of queries, generate diverse and inconsistent responses at irregular intervals. In contrast, domain-specific prompts consistently generate concise responses within a reasonable time. Overall, this study underscores the need for comprehensive evaluation frameworks to enhance the reliability of benchmarking procedures in multidomain AI research.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has become a standard architectural pattern for incorporating domain-specific knowledge into user-facing chat applications powered by Large Language Models (LLMs). RAG systems are characterized by (1) a document retriever that queries a domain-specific corpus for context information relevant to an input query, and (2) an LLM that generates a response based on the provided query and context. However, comprehensive evaluation of RAG systems remains a challenge due to the lack of unified evaluation criteria and annotated datasets. In response, we introduce RAGBench: the first comprehensive, large-scale RAG benchmark dataset of 100k examples. It covers five unique industry-specific domains and various RAG task types. RAGBench examples are sourced from industry corpora such as user manuals, making it particularly relevant for industry applications. Further, we formalize the TRACe evaluation framework: a set of explainable and actionable RAG evaluation metrics applicable across all RAG domains. We release the labeled dataset at https://huggingface.co/datasets/rungalileo/ragbench. RAGBench explainable labels facilitate holistic evaluation of RAG systems, enabling actionable feedback for continuous improvement of production applications. Thorough extensive benchmarking, we find that LLM-based RAG evaluation methods struggle to compete with a finetuned RoBERTa model on the RAG evaluation task. We identify areas where existing approaches fall short and propose the adoption of RAGBench with TRACe towards advancing the state of RAG evaluation systems.

Large pretrained models can be used as annotators, helping replace or augment crowdworkers and enabling distilling generalist models into smaller specialist models. Unfortunately, this comes at a cost: employing top-of-the-line models often requires paying thousands of dollars for API calls, while the resulting datasets are static and challenging to audit. To address these challenges, we propose a simple alternative: rather than directly querying labels from pretrained models, we task models to generate programs that can produce labels. These programs can be stored and applied locally, re-used and extended, and cost orders of magnitude less. Our system, Alchemist, obtains comparable to or better performance than large language model-based annotation in a range of tasks for a fraction of the cost: on average, improvements amount to a 12.9% enhancement while the total labeling costs across all datasets are reduced by a factor of approximately 500x.

Clinical trials are fundamental in developing new drugs, medical devices, and treatments. However, they are often time-consuming and have low success rates. Although there have been initial attempts to create large language models (LLMs) for clinical trial design and patient-trial matching, these models remain task-specific and not adaptable to diverse clinical trial tasks. To address this challenge, we propose a clinical trial foundation model named Panacea, designed to handle multiple tasks, including trial search, trial summarization, trial design, and patient-trial matching. We also assemble a large-scale dataset, named TrialAlign, of 793,279 trial documents and 1,113,207 trial-related scientific papers, to infuse clinical knowledge into the model by pre-training. We further curate TrialInstruct, which has 200,866 of instruction data for fine-tuning. These resources enable Panacea to be widely applicable for a range of clinical trial tasks based on user requirements. We evaluated Panacea on a new benchmark, named TrialPanorama, which covers eight clinical trial tasks. Our method performed the best on seven of the eight tasks compared to six cutting-edge generic or medicine-specific LLMs. Specifically, Panacea showed great potential to collaborate with human experts in crafting the design of eligibility criteria, study arms, and outcome measures, in multi-round conversations. In addition, Panacea achieved 14.42% improvement in patient-trial matching, 41.78% to 52.02% improvement in trial search, and consistently ranked at the top for five aspects of trial summarization. Our approach demonstrates the effectiveness of Panacea in clinical trials and establishes a comprehensive resource, including training data, model, and benchmark, for developing clinical trial foundation models, paving the path for AI-based clinical trial development.

The integration of large language models into public transit systems represents a significant advancement in urban transportation management and passenger experience. This study examines the impact of LLMs within San Antonio's public transit system, leveraging their capabilities in natural language processing, data analysis, and real time communication. By utilizing GTFS and other public transportation information, the research highlights the transformative potential of LLMs in enhancing route planning, reducing wait times, and providing personalized travel assistance. Our case study is the city of San Antonio as part of a project aiming to demonstrate how LLMs can optimize resource allocation, improve passenger satisfaction, and support decision making processes in transit management. We evaluated LLM responses to questions related to both information retrieval and also understanding. Ultimately, we believe that the adoption of LLMs in public transit systems can lead to more efficient, responsive, and user-friendly transportation networks, providing a model for other cities to follow.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable potential for problem solving, with open source models achieving increasingly impressive performance on benchmarks measuring areas from logical reasoning to mathematical ability. Ensembling models can further improve capabilities across a variety of domains. However, conventional methods of combining models at inference time such as shallow fusion necessitate a shared vocabulary and tokenization, and alternatives like fine-tuning for domain-specific performance are both time consuming and computationally expensive. We therefore present an inference-time ensembling algorithm aimed at "averaging" outputs from multiple LLMs and illustrate its improved performance across multiple domains compared to its constituent models alone. Character-wise ensemble decoding, CharED, finds the marginal distribution of each character for an individual model and performs a weighted average to generate an output, character by character. In coding, math, and toxicity benchmarks, we find our proposed model able to combine complimentary strengths of multiple LLMs, regardless of vocabulary, tokenization, or model size.