The proliferation of online misinformation has posed significant threats to public interest. While numerous online users actively participate in the combat against misinformation, many of such responses can be characterized by the lack of politeness and supporting facts. As a solution, text generation approaches are proposed to automatically produce counter-misinformation responses. Nevertheless, existing methods are often trained end-to-end without leveraging external knowledge, resulting in subpar text quality and excessively repetitive responses. In this paper, we propose retrieval augmented response generation for online misinformation (RARG), which collects supporting evidence from scientific sources and generates counter-misinformation responses based on the evidences. In particular, our RARG consists of two stages: (1) evidence collection, where we design a retrieval pipeline to retrieve and rerank evidence documents using a database comprising over 1M academic articles; (2) response generation, in which we align large language models (LLMs) to generate evidence-based responses via reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). We propose a reward function to maximize the utilization of the retrieved evidence while maintaining the quality of the generated text, which yields polite and factual responses that clearly refutes misinformation. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, we study the case of COVID-19 and perform extensive experiments with both in- and cross-domain datasets, where RARG consistently outperforms baselines by generating high-quality counter-misinformation responses.

Current language models are unable to quickly learn new concepts on the fly, often requiring a more involved finetuning process to learn robustly. Prompting in-context is not robust to context distractions, and often fails to confer much information about the new concepts. Classic methods for few-shot word learning in NLP, relying on global word vectors, are less applicable to large language models. In this paper, we introduce a novel approach named CoLLEGe (Concept Learning with Language Embedding Generation) to modernize few-shot concept learning. CoLLEGe is a meta-learning framework capable of generating flexible embeddings for new concepts using a small number of example sentences or definitions. Our primary meta-learning objective is simply to facilitate a language model to make next word predictions in forthcoming sentences, making it compatible with language model pretraining. We design a series of tasks to test new concept learning in challenging real-world scenarios, including new word acquisition, definition inference, and verbal reasoning, and demonstrate that our method succeeds in each setting without task-specific training.

Sonatype's 2023 report found that 97% of developers and security leads integrate generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), into their development process. Concerns about the security implications of this trend have been raised. Developers are now weighing the benefits and risks of LLMs against other relied-upon information sources, such as StackOverflow (SO), requiring empirical data to inform their choice. In this work, our goal is to raise software developers awareness of the security implications when selecting code snippets by empirically comparing the vulnerabilities of ChatGPT and StackOverflow. To achieve this, we used an existing Java dataset from SO with security-related questions and answers. Then, we asked ChatGPT the same SO questions, gathering the generated code for comparison. After curating the dataset, we analyzed the number and types of Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) vulnerabilities of 108 snippets from each platform using CodeQL. ChatGPT-generated code contained 248 vulnerabilities compared to the 302 vulnerabilities found in SO snippets, producing 20% fewer vulnerabilities with a statistically significant difference. Additionally, ChatGPT generated 19 types of CWE, fewer than the 22 found in SO. Our findings suggest developers are under-educated on insecure code propagation from both platforms, as we found 274 unique vulnerabilities and 25 types of CWE. Any code copied and pasted, created by AI or humans, cannot be trusted blindly, requiring good software engineering practices to reduce risk. Future work can help minimize insecure code propagation from any platform.

With the emergence of numerous Large Language Models (LLM), the usage of such models in various Natural Language Processing (NLP) applications is increasing extensively. Counterspeech generation is one such key task where efforts are made to develop generative models by fine-tuning LLMs with hatespeech - counterspeech pairs, but none of these attempts explores the intrinsic properties of large language models in zero-shot settings. In this work, we present a comprehensive analysis of the performances of four LLMs namely GPT-2, DialoGPT, ChatGPT and FlanT5 in zero-shot settings for counterspeech generation, which is the first of its kind. For GPT-2 and DialoGPT, we further investigate the deviation in performance with respect to the sizes (small, medium, large) of the models. On the other hand, we propose three different prompting strategies for generating different types of counterspeech and analyse the impact of such strategies on the performance of the models. Our analysis shows that there is an improvement in generation quality for two datasets (17%), however the toxicity increase (25%) with increase in model size. Considering type of model, GPT-2 and FlanT5 models are significantly better in terms of counterspeech quality but also have high toxicity as compared to DialoGPT. ChatGPT are much better at generating counter speech than other models across all metrics. In terms of prompting, we find that our proposed strategies help in improving counter speech generation across all the models.

Large Language Models (LLMs) raise concerns about lowering the cost of generating texts that could be used for unethical or illegal purposes, especially on social media. This paper investigates the promise of such models to help enforce legal requirements related to the disclosure of sponsored content online. We investigate the use of LLMs for generating synthetic Instagram captions with two objectives: The first objective (fidelity) is to produce realistic synthetic datasets. For this, we implement content-level and network-level metrics to assess whether synthetic captions are realistic. The second objective (utility) is to create synthetic data that is useful for sponsored content detection. For this, we evaluate the effectiveness of the generated synthetic data for training classifiers to identify undisclosed advertisements on Instagram. Our investigations show that the objectives of fidelity and utility may conflict and that prompt engineering is a useful but insufficient strategy. Additionally, we find that while individual synthetic posts may appear realistic, collectively they lack diversity, topic connectivity, and realistic user interaction patterns.

We develop a hierarchical LLM-task-motion planning and replanning framework to efficiently ground an abstracted human command into tangible Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) control through enhanced representations of the world. We also incorporate a holistic replanner to provide real-world feedback with all planners for robust AUV operation. While there has been extensive research in bridging the gap between LLMs and robotic missions, they are unable to guarantee success of AUV applications in the vast and unknown ocean environment. To tackle specific challenges in marine robotics, we design a hierarchical planner to compose executable motion plans, which achieves planning efficiency and solution quality by decomposing long-horizon missions into sub-tasks. At the same time, real-time data stream is obtained by a replanner to address environmental uncertainties during plan execution. Experiments validate that our proposed framework delivers successful AUV performance of long-duration missions through natural language piloting.

This paper explores the pressing issue of risk assessment in Large Language Models (LLMs) as they become increasingly prevalent in various applications. Focusing on how reward models, which are designed to fine-tune pretrained LLMs to align with human values, perceive and categorize different types of risks, we delve into the challenges posed by the subjective nature of preference-based training data. By utilizing the Anthropic Red-team dataset, we analyze major risk categories, including Information Hazards, Malicious Uses, and Discrimination/Hateful content. Our findings indicate that LLMs tend to consider Information Hazards less harmful, a finding confirmed by a specially developed regression model. Additionally, our analysis shows that LLMs respond less stringently to Information Hazards compared to other risks. The study further reveals a significant vulnerability of LLMs to jailbreaking attacks in Information Hazard scenarios, highlighting a critical security concern in LLM risk assessment and emphasizing the need for improved AI safety measures.

With the recent development of large language models (LLMs), models that focus on certain domains and languages have been discussed for their necessity. There is also a growing need for benchmarks to evaluate the performance of current LLMs in each domain. Therefore, in this study, we constructed a benchmark comprising multiple tasks specific to the Japanese and financial domains and performed benchmark measurements on some models. Consequently, we confirmed that GPT-4 is currently outstanding, and that the constructed benchmarks function effectively. According to our analysis, our benchmark can differentiate benchmark scores among models in all performance ranges by combining tasks with different difficulties.

Relation extraction is a critical task in the field of natural language processing with numerous real-world applications. Existing research primarily focuses on monolingual relation extraction or cross-lingual enhancement for relation extraction. Yet, there remains a significant gap in understanding relation extraction in the mix-lingual (or code-switching) scenario, where individuals intermix contents from different languages within sentences, generating mix-lingual content. Due to the lack of a dedicated dataset, the effectiveness of existing relation extraction models in such a scenario is largely unexplored. To address this issue, we introduce a novel task of considering relation extraction in the mix-lingual scenario called MixRE and constructing the human-annotated dataset MixRED to support this task. In addition to constructing the MixRED dataset, we evaluate both state-of-the-art supervised models and large language models (LLMs) on MixRED, revealing their respective advantages and limitations in the mix-lingual scenario. Furthermore, we delve into factors influencing model performance within the MixRE task and uncover promising directions for enhancing the performance of both supervised models and LLMs in this novel task.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors are widely adopted as higher investment return indicators. Accordingly, ongoing efforts are being made to automate ESG evaluation with language models to extract signals from massive web text easily. However, recent approaches suffer from a lack of training data, as rating agencies keep their evaluation metrics confidential. This paper investigates whether state-of-the-art language models like GPT-4 can be guided to align with unknown ESG evaluation criteria through strategies such as prompting, chain-of-thought reasoning, and dynamic in-context learning. We demonstrate the efficacy of these approaches by ranking 2nd in the Shared-Task ML-ESG-3 Impact Type track for Korean without updating the model on the provided training data. We also explore how adjusting prompts impacts the ability of language models to address financial tasks leveraging smaller models with openly available weights. We observe longer general pre-training to correlate with enhanced performance in financial downstream tasks. Our findings showcase the potential of language models to navigate complex, subjective evaluation guidelines despite lacking explicit training examples, revealing opportunities for training-free solutions for financial downstream tasks.