Tabular data is ubiquitous in real-world applications and abundant on the web, yet its annotation has traditionally required human labor, posing a significant scalability bottleneck for tabular machine learning. Our methodology can successfully annotate a large amount of tabular data and can be flexibly steered to generate various types of annotations based on specific research objectives, as we demonstrate with SQL annotation and input-target column annotation as examples. As a result, we release AnnotatedTables, a collection of 32,119 databases with LLM-generated annotations. The dataset includes 405,616 valid SQL programs, making it the largest SQL dataset with associated tabular data that supports query execution. To further demonstrate the value of our methodology and dataset, we perform two follow-up research studies. 1) We investigate whether LLMs can translate SQL programs to Rel programs, a database language previously unknown to LLMs, while obtaining the same execution results. Using our Incremental Prompt Engineering methods based on execution feedback, we show that LLMs can produce adequate translations with few-shot learning. 2) We evaluate the performance of TabPFN, a recent neural tabular classifier trained on Bayesian priors, on 2,720 tables with input-target columns identified and annotated by LLMs. On average, TabPFN performs on par with the baseline AutoML method, though the relative performance can vary significantly from one data table to another, making both models viable for practical applications depending on the situation. Our findings underscore the potential of LLMs in automating the annotation of large volumes of diverse tabular data.

Effective summarization of unstructured patient data in electronic health records (EHRs) is crucial for accurate diagnosis and efficient patient care, yet clinicians often struggle with information overload and time constraints. This review dives into recent literature and case studies on both the significant impacts and outstanding issues of patient chart review on communications, diagnostics, and management. It also discusses recent efforts to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into clinical summarization tasks, and its transformative impact on the clinician's potential, including but not limited to reductions of administrative burden and improved patient-centered care.

As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly prevalent in a wide variety of applications, concerns about the safety of their outputs have become more significant. Most efforts at safety-tuning or moderation today take on a predominantly Western-centric view of safety, especially for toxic, hateful, or violent speech. In this paper, we describe LionGuard, a Singapore-contextualized moderation classifier that can serve as guardrails against unsafe LLM outputs. When assessed on Singlish data, LionGuard outperforms existing widely-used moderation APIs, which are not finetuned for the Singapore context, by 14% (binary) and up to 51% (multi-label). Our work highlights the benefits of localization for moderation classifiers and presents a practical and scalable approach for low-resource languages.

This work investigates how personality expression and embodiment affect personality perception and learning in educational conversational agents. We extend an existing personality-driven conversational agent framework by integrating LLM-based conversation support tailored to an educational application. We describe a user study built on this system to evaluate two distinct personality styles: high extroversion and agreeableness and low extroversion and agreeableness. For each personality style, we assess three models: (1) a dialogue-only model that conveys personality through dialogue, (2) an animated human model that expresses personality solely through dialogue, and (3) an animated human model that expresses personality through both dialogue and body and facial animations. The results indicate that all models are positively perceived regarding both personality and learning outcomes. Models with high personality traits are perceived as more engaging than those with low personality traits. We provide a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative analysis of perceived personality traits, learning parameters, and user experiences based on participant ratings of the model types and personality styles, as well as users' responses to open-ended questions.

The recent introduction of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) combine the inherent power of large language models (LLMs) with the renewed capabilities to reason about the multimodal context. The potential usage scenarios for MLLMs significantly outpace their text-only counterparts. Many recent works in visualization have demonstrated MLLMs' capability to understand and interpret visualization results and explain the content of the visualization to users in natural language. In the machine learning community, the general vision capabilities of MLLMs have been evaluated and tested through various visual understanding benchmarks. However, the ability of MLLMs to accomplish specific visualization tasks based on visual perception has not been properly explored and evaluated, particularly, from a visualization-centric perspective. In this work, we aim to fill the gap by utilizing the concept of visualization literacy to evaluate MLLMs. We assess MLLMs' performance over two popular visualization literacy evaluation datasets (VLAT and mini-VLAT). Under the framework of visualization literacy, we develop a general setup to compare different multimodal large language models (e.g., GPT4-o, Claude 3 Opus, Gemini 1.5 Pro) as well as against existing human baselines. Our study demonstrates MLLMs' competitive performance in visualization literacy, where they outperform humans in certain tasks such as identifying correlations, clusters, and hierarchical structures.

The availability of powerful open-source large language models (LLMs) opens exciting use-cases, such as automated personal assistants that adapt to the user's unique data and demands. Two key desiderata for such assistants are personalization-in the sense that the assistant should reflect the user's own style-and privacy-in the sense that users may prefer to always store their personal data locally, on their own computing device. We present a new design for such an automated assistant, for the specific use case of personal assistant for email generation, which we call Panza. Specifically, Panza can be both trained and inferenced locally on commodity hardware, and is personalized to the user's writing style. Panza's personalization features are based on a new technique called data playback, which allows us to fine-tune an LLM to better reflect a user's writing style using limited data. We show that, by combining efficient fine-tuning and inference methods, Panza can be executed entirely locally using limited resources-specifically, it can be executed within the same resources as a free Google Colab instance. Finally, our key methodological contribution is a careful study of evaluation metrics, and of how different choices of system components (e.g. the use of Retrieval-Augmented Generation or different fine-tuning approaches) impact the system's performance.

Language models are transforming the ways that their users engage with the world. Despite impressive capabilities, over-consumption of language model outputs risks propagating unchecked errors in the short-term and damaging human capabilities for critical thinking in the long-term, particularly in knowledge-based tasks. How can we develop scaffolding around language models to curate more appropriate use? We propose selective frictions for language model experiences, inspired by behavioral science interventions, to dampen misuse. Frictions involve small modifications to a user's experience, e.g., the addition of a button impeding model access and reminding a user of their expertise relative to the model. Through a user study with real humans, we observe shifts in user behavior from the imposition of a friction over LLMs in the context of a multi-topic question-answering task as a representative task that people may use LLMs for, e.g., in education and information retrieval. We find that frictions modulate over-reliance by driving down users' click rates while minimally affecting accuracy for those topics. Yet, frictions may have unintended effects. We find marked differences in users' click behaviors even on topics where frictions were not provisioned. Our contributions motivate further study of human-AI behavioral interaction to inform more effective and appropriate LLM use.

Identifying user's opinions and stances in long conversation threads on various topics can be extremely critical for enhanced personalization, market research, political campaigns, customer service, conflict resolution, targeted advertising, and content moderation. Hence, training language models to automate this task is critical. However, to train such models, gathering manual annotations has multiple challenges: 1) It is time-consuming and costly; 2) Conversation threads could be very long, increasing chances of noisy annotations; and 3) Interpreting instances where a user changes their opinion within a conversation is difficult because often such transitions are subtle and not expressed explicitly. Inspired by the recent success of large language models (LLMs) for complex natural language processing (NLP) tasks, we leverage Mistral Large and GPT-4 to automate the human annotation process on the following two tasks while also providing reasoning: i) User Stance classification, which involves labeling a user's stance of a post in a conversation on a five-point scale; ii) User Dogmatism classification, which deals with labeling a user's overall opinion in the conversation on a four-point scale. The majority voting on zero-shot, one-shot, and few-shot annotations from these two LLMs on 764 multi-user Reddit conversations helps us curate the USDC dataset. USDC is then used to finetune and instruction-tune multiple deployable small language models for the 5-class stance and 4-class dogmatism classification tasks. We make the code and dataset publicly available [https://anonymous.4open.science/r/USDC-0F7F].

The potential of transformer-based LLMs risks being hindered by privacy concerns due to their reliance on extensive datasets, possibly including sensitive information. Regulatory measures like GDPR and CCPA call for using robust auditing tools to address potential privacy issues, with Membership Inference Attacks (MIA) being the primary method for assessing LLMs' privacy risks. Differently from traditional MIA approaches, often requiring computationally intensive training of additional models, this paper introduces an efficient methodology that generates \textit{noisy neighbors} for a target sample by adding stochastic noise in the embedding space, requiring operating the target model in inference mode only. Our findings demonstrate that this approach closely matches the effectiveness of employing shadow models, showing its usability in practical privacy auditing scenarios.

Adversarial benchmarks validate model abilities by providing samples that fool models but not humans. However, despite the proliferation of datasets that claim to be adversarial, there does not exist an established metric to evaluate how adversarial these datasets are. To address this lacuna, we introduce ADVSCORE, a metric which quantifies how adversarial and discriminative an adversarial dataset is and exposes the features that make data adversarial. We then use ADVSCORE to underpin a dataset creation pipeline that incentivizes writing a high-quality adversarial dataset. As a proof of concept, we use ADVSCORE to collect an adversarial question answering (QA) dataset, ADVQA, from our pipeline. The high-quality questions in ADVQA surpasses three adversarial benchmarks across domains at fooling several models but not humans. We validate our result based on difficulty estimates from 9,347 human responses on four datasets and predictions from three models. Moreover, ADVSCORE uncovers which adversarial tactics used by human writers fool models (e.g., GPT-4) but not humans. Through ADVSCORE and its analyses, we offer guidance on revealing language model vulnerabilities and producing reliable adversarial examples.