Goto

Collaborating Authors

 Large Language Model


BertaQA: How Much Do Language Models Know About Local Culture?

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit extensive knowledge about the world, but most evaluations have been limited to global or anglocentric subjects. This raises the question of how well these models perform on topics relevant to other cultures, whose presence on the web is not that prominent. To address this gap, we introduce BertaQA, a multiple-choice trivia dataset that is parallel in English and Basque. The dataset consists of a local subset with questions pertinent to the Basque culture, and a global subset with questions of broader interest. We find that state-of-the-art LLMs struggle with local cultural knowledge, even as they excel on global topics. However, we show that continued pre-training in Basque significantly improves the models' performance on Basque culture, even when queried in English. To our knowledge, this is the first solid evidence of knowledge transfer from a low-resource to a high-resource language. Our analysis sheds light on the complex interplay between language and knowledge, and reveals that some prior findings do not fully hold when reassessed on local topics. Our dataset and evaluation code are available under open licenses at https://github.com/juletx/BertaQA.


VersiCode: Towards Version-controllable Code Generation

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Significant research has focused on improving the performance of large language model on code-related tasks due to their practical importance. Although performance is typically evaluated using public benchmark datasets, the existing datasets do not account for the concept of \emph{version}, which is crucial in professional software development. In this paper, we introduce VersiCode, the first comprehensive dataset designed to assess the ability of large language models to generate verifiable code for specific library versions. VersiCode encompasses 300 libraries across more than 2,000 versions spanning 9 years. We design two dedicated evaluation tasks: version-specific code completion (VSCC) and version-aware code editing (VACE). Comprehensive experiments are conducted to benchmark the performance of LLMs, revealing the challenging nature of these tasks and VersiCode, that even state-of-the-art LLMs struggle to generate version-correct code. This dataset, together with the proposed tasks, sheds light on LLMs' capabilities and limitations in handling version-specific code generation, and opens up an important new area of research for further investigation. The resources can be found at https://github.com/wutong8023/VersiCode.


ROADWork Dataset: Learning to Recognize, Observe, Analyze and Drive Through Work Zones

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Perceiving and navigating through work zones is challenging and under-explored, even with major strides in self-driving research. An important reason is the lack of open datasets for developing new algorithms to address this long-tailed scenario. We propose the ROADWork dataset to learn how to recognize, observe and analyze and drive through work zones. We find that state-of-the-art foundation models perform poorly on work zones. With our dataset, we improve upon detecting work zone objects (+26.2 AP), while discovering work zones with higher precision (+32.5%) at a much higher discovery rate (12.8 times), significantly improve detecting (+23.9 AP) and reading (+14.2% 1-NED) work zone signs and describing work zones (+36.7 SPICE). We also compute drivable paths from work zone navigation videos and show that it is possible to predict navigational goals and pathways such that 53.6% goals have angular error (AE) < 0.5 degrees (+9.9 %) and 75.3% pathways have AE < 0.5 degrees (+8.1 %).


DCA-Bench: A Benchmark for Dataset Curation Agents

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

The quality of datasets plays an increasingly crucial role in the research and development of modern artificial intelligence (AI). Despite the proliferation of open dataset platforms nowadays, data quality issues, such as insufficient documentation, inaccurate annotations, and ethical concerns, remain common in datasets widely used in AI. Furthermore, these issues are often subtle and difficult to be detected by rule-based scripts, requiring expensive manual identification and verification by dataset users or maintainers. With the increasing capability of large language models (LLMs), it is promising to streamline the curation of datasets with LLM agents. In this work, as the initial step towards this goal, we propose a dataset curation agent benchmark, DCA-Bench, to measure LLM agents' capability of detecting hidden dataset quality issues. Specifically, we collect diverse real-world dataset quality issues from eight open dataset platforms as a testbed. Additionally, to establish an automatic pipeline for evaluating the success of LLM agents, which requires a nuanced understanding of the agent outputs, we implement a dedicated Evaluator using another LLM agent. We demonstrate that the LLM-based Evaluator empirically aligns well with human evaluation, allowing reliable automatic evaluation on the proposed benchmark. We further conduct experiments on several baseline LLM agents on the proposed benchmark and demonstrate the complexity of the task, indicating that applying LLMs to real-world dataset curation still requires further in-depth exploration and innovation. Finally, the proposed benchmark can also serve as a testbed for measuring the capability of LLMs in problem discovery rather than just problem-solving. The benchmark suite is available at \url{https://github.com/TRAIS-Lab/dca-bench}.


When is an Embedding Model More Promising than Another?

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Embedders play a central role in machine learning, projecting any object into numerical representations that can, in turn, be leveraged to perform various downstream tasks. The evaluation of embedding models typically depends on domain-specific empirical approaches utilizing downstream tasks, primarily because of the lack of a standardized framework for comparison. However, acquiring adequately large and representative datasets for conducting these assessments is not always viable and can prove to be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming. In this paper, we present a unified approach to evaluate embedders. First, we establish theoretical foundations for comparing embedding models, drawing upon the concepts of sufficiency and informativeness. We then leverage these concepts to devise a tractable comparison criterion (information sufficiency), leading to a task-agnostic and self-supervised ranking procedure. We demonstrate experimentally that our approach aligns closely with the capability of embedding models to facilitate various downstream tasks in both natural language processing and molecular biology. This effectively offers practitioners a valuable tool for prioritizing model trials.


Transferring Knowledge from Large Foundation Models to Small Downstream Models

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

How do we transfer the relevant knowledge from ever larger foundation models into small, task-specific downstream models that can run at much lower costs? Standard transfer learning using pre-trained weights as the initialization transfers limited information and commits us to often massive pre-trained architectures. This procedure also precludes combining multiple pre-trained models that learn complementary information. To address these shortcomings, we introduce Adaptive Feature Transfer (AFT). Instead of transferring weights, AFT operates purely on features, thereby decoupling the choice of the pre-trained model from the smaller downstream model. Rather than indiscriminately compressing all pre-trained features, AFT adaptively transfers pre-trained features that are most useful for performing the downstream task, using a simple regularization that adds minimal overhead. Across multiple vision, language, and multi-modal datasets, AFT achieves significantly better downstream performance compared to alternatives with a similar computational cost. Furthermore, AFT reliably translates improvement in pre-trained models into improvement in downstream performance, even if the downstream model is over $50\times$ smaller, and can effectively transfer complementary information learned by multiple pre-trained models.


Scientific Computing with Large Language Models

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

We provide an overview of the emergence of large language models for scientific computing applications. We highlight use cases that involve natural language processing of scientific documents and specialized languages designed to describe physical systems. For the former, chatbot style applications appear in medicine, mathematics and physics and can be used iteratively with domain experts for problem solving. We also review specialized languages within molecular biology, the languages of molecules, proteins, and DNA where language models are being used to predict properties and even create novel physical systems at much faster rates than traditional computing methods.


Guiding LLM Temporal Logic Generation with Explicit Separation of Data and Control

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Temporal logics are powerful tools that are widely used for the synthesis and verification of reactive systems. The recent progress on Large Language Models (LLMs) has the potential to make the process of writing such specifications more accessible. However, writing specifications in temporal logics remains challenging for all but the most expert users. A key question in using LLMs for temporal logic specification engineering is to understand what kind of guidance is most helpful to the LLM and the users to easily produce specifications. Looking specifically at the problem of reactive program synthesis, we explore the impact of providing an LLM with guidance on the separation of control and data--making explicit for the LLM what functionality is relevant for the specification, and treating the remaining functionality as an implementation detail for a series of pre-defined functions and predicates. We present a benchmark set and find that this separation of concerns improves specification generation. Our benchmark provides a test set against which to verify future work in LLM generation of temporal logic specifications.


Using AI-Based Coding Assistants in Practice: State of Affairs, Perceptions, and Ways Forward

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

The last several years saw the emergence of AI assistants for code -- multi-purpose AI-based helpers in software engineering. Their quick development makes it necessary to better understand how specifically developers are using them, why they are not using them in certain parts of their development workflow, and what needs to be improved. In this work, we carried out a large-scale survey aimed at how AI assistants are used, focusing on specific software development activities and stages. We collected opinions of 481 programmers on five broad activities: (a) implementing new features, (b) writing tests, (c) bug triaging, (d) refactoring, and (e) writing natural-language artifacts, as well as their individual stages. Our results show that usage of AI assistants varies depending on activity and stage. For instance, developers find writing tests and natural-language artifacts to be the least enjoyable activities and want to delegate them the most, currently using AI assistants to generate tests and test data, as well as generating comments and docstrings most of all. This can be a good focus for features aimed to help developers right now. As for why developers do not use assistants, in addition to general things like trust and company policies, there are fixable issues that can serve as a guide for further research, e.g., the lack of project-size context, and lack of awareness about assistants. We believe that our comprehensive and specific results are especially needed now to steer active research toward where users actually need AI assistants.


Post-Hoc Answer Attribution for Grounded and Trustworthy Long Document Comprehension: Task, Insights, and Challenges

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Attributing answer text to its source document for information-seeking questions is crucial for building trustworthy, reliable, and accountable systems. We formulate a new task of post-hoc answer attribution for long document comprehension (LDC). Owing to the lack of long-form abstractive and information-seeking LDC datasets, we refactor existing datasets to assess the strengths and weaknesses of existing retrieval-based and proposed answer decomposition and textual entailment-based optimal selection attribution systems for this task. We throw light on the limitations of existing datasets and the need for datasets to assess the actual performance of systems on this task.