While large language models (LLMs) have made notable advancements in natural language processing, they continue to struggle with processing extensive text. Memory mechanism offers a flexible solution for managing long contexts, utilizing techniques such as compression, summarization, and structuring to facilitate nuanced and efficient handling of large volumes of text. However, existing techniques face challenges with static knowledge integration, leading to insufficient adaptation to task-specific needs and missing multi-segmentation relationships, which hinders the dynamic reorganization and logical combination of relevant segments during the response process. To address these issues, we introduce a novel strategy, Question then Reflection Memory Mechanism (QRMeM), incorporating a dual-structured memory pool. This pool synergizes static textual content with structured graph guidance, fostering a reflective trial-and-error approach for navigating and identifying relevant segments. Our evaluation across multiple-choice questions (MCQ) and multi-document question answering (Multi-doc QA) benchmarks showcases QRMeM enhanced performance compared to existing approaches.

Prior research in computational argumentation has mainly focused on scoring the quality of arguments, with less attention on explicating logical errors. In this work, we introduce four sets of explainable templates for common informal logical fallacies designed to explicate a fallacy's implicit logic. Using our templates, we conduct an annotation study on top of 400 fallacious arguments taken from LOGIC dataset and achieve a high agreement score (Krippendorf's alpha of 0.54) and reasonable coverage (0.83). Finally, we conduct an experiment for detecting the structure of fallacies and discover that state-of-the-art language models struggle with detecting fallacy templates (0.47 accuracy). To facilitate research on fallacies, we make our dataset and guidelines publicly available.

Decompilation aims to convert binary code to high-level source code, but traditional tools like Ghidra often produce results that are difficult to read and execute. Motivated by the advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs), we propose LLM4Decompile, the first and largest open-source LLM series (1.3B to 33B) trained to decompile binary code. We optimize the LLM training process and introduce the LLM4Decompile-End models to decompile binary directly. The resulting models significantly outperform GPT-4o and Ghidra on the HumanEval and ExeBench benchmarks by over 100%. Additionally, we improve the standard refinement approach to fine-tune the LLM4Decompile-Ref models, enabling them to effectively refine the decompiled code from Ghidra and achieve a further 16.2% improvement over the LLM4Decompile-End. LLM4Decompile demonstrates the potential of LLMs to revolutionize binary code decompilation, delivering remarkable improvements in readability and executability while complementing conventional tools for optimal results. Our code, dataset, and models are released at https://github.com/albertan017/LLM4Decompile

Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed machine learning but raised significant legal concerns due to their potential to produce text that infringes on copyrights, resulting in several high-profile lawsuits. The legal landscape is struggling to keep pace with these rapid advancements, with ongoing debates about whether generated text might plagiarize copyrighted materials. Current LLMs may infringe on copyrights or overly restrict non-copyrighted texts, leading to these challenges: (i) the need for a comprehensive evaluation benchmark to assess copyright compliance from multiple aspects; (ii) evaluating robustness against safeguard bypassing attacks; and (iii) developing effective defenses targeted against the generation of copyrighted text. To tackle these challenges, we introduce a curated dataset to evaluate methods, test attack strategies, and propose lightweight, real-time defenses to prevent the generation of copyrighted text, ensuring the safe and lawful use of LLMs. Our experiments demonstrate that current LLMs frequently output copyrighted text, and that jailbreaking attacks can significantly increase the volume of copyrighted output. Our proposed defense mechanisms significantly reduce the volume of copyrighted text generated by LLMs by effectively refusing malicious requests. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/xz-liu/SHIELD

Medical knowledge is context-dependent and requires consistent reasoning across various natural language expressions of semantically equivalent phrases. This is particularly crucial for drug names, where patients often use brand names like Advil or Tylenol instead of their generic equivalents. To study this, we create a new robustness dataset, RABBITS, to evaluate performance differences on medical benchmarks after swapping brand and generic drug names using physician expert annotations. We assess both open-source and API-based LLMs on MedQA and MedMCQA, revealing a consistent performance drop ranging from 1-10\%. Furthermore, we identify a potential source of this fragility as the contamination of test data in widely used pre-training datasets. All code is accessible at https://github.com/BittermanLab/RABBITS, and a HuggingFace leaderboard is available at https://huggingface.co/spaces/AIM-Harvard/rabbits-leaderboard.

In an era of model and data proliferation in machine learning/AI especially marked by the rapid advancement of open-sourced technologies, there arises a critical need for standardized consistent documentation. Our work addresses the information incompleteness in current human-generated model and data cards. We propose an automated generation approach using Large Language Models (LLMs). Our key contributions include the establishment of CardBench, a comprehensive dataset aggregated from over 4.8k model cards and 1.4k data cards, coupled with the development of the CardGen pipeline comprising a two-step retrieval process. Our approach exhibits enhanced completeness, objectivity, and faithfulness in generated model and data cards, a significant step in responsible AI documentation practices ensuring better accountability and traceability.

An important factor when it comes to generating fact-checking explanations is the selection of evidence: intuitively, high-quality explanations can only be generated given the right evidence. In this work, we investigate the impact of human-curated vs. machine-selected evidence for explanation generation using large language models. To assess the quality of explanations, we focus on transparency (whether an explanation cites sources properly) and utility (whether an explanation is helpful in clarifying a claim). Surprisingly, we found that large language models generate similar or higher quality explanations using machine-selected evidence, suggesting carefully curated evidence (by humans) may not be necessary. That said, even with the best model, the generated explanations are not always faithful to the sources, suggesting further room for improvement in explanation generation for fact-checking.

Advances in generative AI (GenAI) have raised concerns about detecting and discerning AI-generated content from human-generated content. Most existing literature assumes a paradigm where 'expert' organized disinformation creators and flawed AI models deceive 'ordinary' users. Based on longitudinal ethnographic research with misinformation creators and consumers between 2022-2023, we instead find that GenAI supports bricolage work, where non-experts increasingly use GenAI to remix, repackage, and (re)produce content to meet their personal needs and desires. This research yielded four key findings: First, participants primarily used GenAI for creation, rather than truth-seeking. Second, a spreading 'influencer millionaire' narrative drove participants to become content creators, using GenAI as a productivity tool to generate a volume of (often misinformative) content. Third, GenAI lowered the barrier to entry for content creation across modalities, enticing consumers to become creators and significantly increasing existing creators' output. Finally, participants used Gen AI to learn and deploy marketing tactics to expand engagement and monetize their content. We argue for shifting analysis from the public as consumers of AI content to bricoleurs who use GenAI creatively, often without a detailed understanding of its underlying technology. We analyze how these understudied emergent uses of GenAI produce new or accelerated misinformation harms, and their implications for AI products, platforms and policies.

We introduce ChatGLM, an evolving family of large language models that we have been developing over time. This report primarily focuses on the GLM-4 language series, which includes GLM-4, GLM-4-Air, and GLM-4-9B. They represent our most capable models that are trained with all the insights and lessons gained from the preceding three generations of ChatGLM. To date, the GLM-4 models are pre-trained on ten trillions of tokens mostly in Chinese and English, along with a small set of corpus from 24 languages, and aligned primarily for Chinese and English usage. The high-quality alignment is achieved via a multi-stage post-training process, which involves supervised fine-tuning and learning from human feedback. Evaluations show that GLM-4 1) closely rivals or outperforms GPT-4 in terms of general metrics such as MMLU, GSM8K, MATH, BBH, GPQA, and HumanEval, 2) gets close to GPT-4-Turbo in instruction following as measured by IFEval, 3) matches GPT-4 Turbo (128K) and Claude 3 for long context tasks, and 4) outperforms GPT-4 in Chinese alignments as measured by AlignBench. The GLM-4 All Tools model is further aligned to understand user intent and autonomously decide when and which tool(s) touse -- including web browser, Python interpreter, text-to-image model, and user-defined functions -- to effectively complete complex tasks. In practical applications, it matches and even surpasses GPT-4 All Tools in tasks like accessing online information via web browsing and solving math problems using Python interpreter. Over the course, we have open-sourced a series of models, including ChatGLM-6B (three generations), GLM-4-9B (128K, 1M), GLM-4V-9B, WebGLM, and CodeGeeX, attracting over 10 million downloads on Hugging face in the year 2023 alone. The open models can be accessed through https://github.com/THUDM and https://huggingface.co/THUDM.

With the development of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) technology, its general capabilities are increasingly powerful. To evaluate the various abilities of MLLMs, numerous evaluation systems have emerged. But now there is still a lack of a comprehensive method to evaluate MLLMs in the tasks related to flowcharts, which are very important in daily life and work. We propose the first comprehensive method, FlowCE, to assess MLLMs across various dimensions for tasks related to flowcharts. It encompasses evaluating MLLMs' abilities in Reasoning, Localization Recognition, Information Extraction, Logical Verification, and Summarization on flowcharts. However, we find that even the GPT4o model achieves only a score of 56.63. Among open-source models, Phi-3-Vision obtained the highest score of 49.97. We hope that FlowCE can contribute to future research on MLLMs for tasks based on flowcharts. \url{https://github.com/360AILAB-NLP/FlowCE} \end{abstract}