This paper investigates the empathetic responding capabilities of ChatGPT, particularly its latest iteration, GPT-4, in comparison to human-generated responses to a wide range of emotional scenarios, both positive and negative. We employ a rigorous evaluation methodology, involving a between-groups study with 600 participants, to evaluate the level of empathy in responses generated by humans and ChatGPT. ChatGPT is prompted in two distinct ways: a standard approach and one explicitly detailing empathy's cognitive, affective, and compassionate counterparts. Our findings indicate that the average empathy rating of responses generated by ChatGPT exceeds those crafted by humans by approximately 10%. Additionally, instructing ChatGPT to incorporate a clear understanding of empathy in its responses makes the responses align approximately 5 times more closely with the expectations of individuals possessing a high degree of empathy, compared to human responses. The proposed evaluation framework serves as a scalable and adaptable framework to assess the empathetic capabilities of newer and updated versions of large language models, eliminating the need to replicate the current study's results in future research.

Retrieval-augmented language models (RALMs) have demonstrated significant potential in refining and expanding their internal memory by retrieving evidence from external sources. However, RALMs will inevitably encounter knowledge conflicts when integrating their internal memory with external sources. Knowledge conflicts can ensnare RALMs in a tug-of-war between knowledge, limiting their practical applicability. In this paper, we focus on exploring and resolving knowledge conflicts in RALMs. First, we present an evaluation framework for assessing knowledge conflicts across various dimensions. Then, we investigate the behavior and preference of RALMs from the following two perspectives: (1) Conflicts between internal memory and external sources: We find that stronger RALMs emerge with the Dunning-Kruger effect, persistently favoring their faulty internal memory even when correct evidence is provided. Besides, RALMs exhibit an availability bias towards common knowledge; (2) Conflicts between truthful, irrelevant and misleading evidence: We reveal that RALMs follow the principle of majority rule, leaning towards placing trust in evidence that appears more frequently. Moreover, we find that RALMs exhibit confirmation bias, and are more willing to choose evidence that is consistent with their internal memory. To solve the challenge of knowledge conflicts, we propose a method called Conflict-Disentangle Contrastive Decoding (CD2) to better calibrate the model's confidence. Experimental results demonstrate that our CD2 can effectively resolve knowledge conflicts in RALMs.

Some of the major limitations identified in the areas of argument mining, argument generation, and natural language argument analysis are related to the complexity of annotating argumentatively rich data, the limited size of these corpora, and the constraints that represent the different languages and domains in which these data is annotated. To address these limitations, in this paper we present the following contributions: (i) an effective methodology for the automatic generation of natural language arguments in different topics and languages, (ii) the largest publicly available corpus of natural language argumentation schemes, and (iii) a set of solid baselines and fine-tuned models for the automatic identification of argumentation schemes.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated with human daily applications rapidly, many societal and ethical concerns are raised regarding the behavior of LLMs. One of the ways to comprehend LLMs' behavior is to analyze their personalities. Many recent studies quantify LLMs' personalities using self-assessment tests that are created for humans. Yet many critiques question the applicability and reliability of these self-assessment tests when applied to LLMs. In this paper, we investigate LLM personalities using an alternate personality measurement method, which we refer to as the external evaluation method, where instead of prompting LLMs with multiple-choice questions in the Likert scale, we evaluate LLMs' personalities by analyzing their responses toward open-ended situational questions using an external machine learning model. We first fine-tuned a Llama2-7B model as the MBTI personality predictor that outperforms the state-of-the-art models as the tool to analyze LLMs' responses. Then, we prompt the LLMs with situational questions and ask them to generate Twitter posts and comments, respectively, in order to assess their personalities when playing two different roles. Using the external personality evaluation method, we identify that the obtained personality types for LLMs are significantly different when generating posts versus comments, whereas humans show a consistent personality profile in these two different situations. This shows that LLMs can exhibit different personalities based on different scenarios, thus highlighting a fundamental difference between personality in LLMs and humans. With our work, we call for a re-evaluation of personality definition and measurement in LLMs.

Entity Alignment (EA) is vital for integrating diverse knowledge graph (KG) data, playing a crucial role in data-driven AI applications. Traditional EA methods primarily rely on comparing entity embeddings, but their effectiveness is constrained by the limited input KG data and the capabilities of the representation learning techniques. Against this backdrop, we introduce ChatEA, an innovative framework that incorporates large language models (LLMs) to improve EA. To address the constraints of limited input KG data, ChatEA introduces a KG-code translation module that translates KG structures into a format understandable by LLMs, thereby allowing LLMs to utilize their extensive background knowledge to improve EA accuracy. To overcome the over-reliance on entity embedding comparisons, ChatEA implements a two-stage EA strategy that capitalizes on LLMs' capability for multi-step reasoning in a dialogue format, thereby enhancing accuracy while preserving efficiency. Our experimental results affirm ChatEA's superior performance, highlighting LLMs' potential in facilitating EA tasks.

Lexical Simplification (LS) automatically replaces difficult to read words for easier alternatives while preserving a sentence's original meaning. LS is a precursor to Text Simplification with the aim of improving text accessibility to various target demographics, including children, second language learners, individuals with reading disabilities or low literacy. Several datasets exist for LS. These LS datasets specialize on one or two sub-tasks within the LS pipeline. However, as of this moment, no single LS dataset has been developed that covers all LS sub-tasks. We present MultiLS, the first LS framework that allows for the creation of a multi-task LS dataset. We also present MultiLS-PT, the first dataset to be created using the MultiLS framework. We demonstrate the potential of MultiLS-PT by carrying out all LS sub-tasks of (1). lexical complexity prediction (LCP), (2). substitute generation, and (3). substitute ranking for Portuguese. Model performances are reported, ranging from transformer-based models to more recent large language models (LLMs).

This paper investigates the radioactivity of LLM-generated texts, i.e. whether it is possible to detect that such input was used as training data. Conventional methods like membership inference can carry out this detection with some level of accuracy. We show that watermarked training data leaves traces easier to detect and much more reliable than membership inference. We link the contamination level to the watermark robustness, its proportion in the training set, and the fine-tuning process. We notably demonstrate that training on watermarked synthetic instructions can be detected with high confidence (p-value < 1e-5) even when as little as 5% of training text is watermarked. Thus, LLM watermarking, originally designed for detecting machine-generated text, gives the ability to easily identify if the outputs of a watermarked LLM were used to fine-tune another LLM.

The therapeutic working alliance is a critical factor in predicting the success of psychotherapy treatment. Traditionally, working alliance assessment relies on questionnaires completed by both therapists and patients. In this paper, we present COMPASS, a novel framework to directly infer the therapeutic working alliance from the natural language used in psychotherapy sessions. Our approach utilizes advanced large language models to analyze transcripts of psychotherapy sessions and compare them with distributed representations of statements in the working alliance inventory. Analyzing a dataset of over 950 sessions covering diverse psychiatric conditions, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in microscopically mapping patient-therapist alignment trajectories and providing interpretability for clinical psychiatry and in identifying emerging patterns related to the condition being treated. By employing various neural topic modeling techniques in combination with generative language prompting, we analyze the topical characteristics of different psychiatric conditions and incorporate temporal modeling to capture the evolution of topics at a turn-level resolution. This combined framework enhances the understanding of therapeutic interactions, enabling timely feedback for therapists regarding conversation quality and providing interpretable insights to improve the effectiveness of psychotherapy.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently showcased remarkable generalizability in various domains. Despite their extensive knowledge, LLMs still face challenges in efficiently utilizing encoded knowledge to develop accurate and logical reasoning processes. To mitigate this problem, we introduced Hint-before-Solving Prompting (HSP), which guides the model to generate hints (e.g., specific knowledge or key ideas) for solving the problem and then generate solutions containing intermediate reasoning steps. Since HSP is orthogonal to prompting methods (e.g., Chain-of-Thought (CoT)), we applied HSP to CoT, Least-to-Most, Plan-and-Solve, and Standard promptings. The results of extensive experiments on 6 reasoning benchmarks and 4 open-source LLMs demonstrate that HSP can effectively improve the accuracy of reasoning tasks: (1) By applying high-quality hint-enhanced HSP to CoT prompting, Llama2-70B-Chat shows an improvement of 9.7. (2) Beyond exploring training-free LLM capabilities, we built the HSPMATH dataset based on HSP and fine-tuned Llemma-7B, reaching 64.3 accuracy, surpassing GPT-3.5 and WizardMath-13B. We make our code and dataset publicly available at \url{https://github.com/jinlanfu/HSP}.

Do pretrained language models have knowledge regarding the surface information of tokens? We examined the surface information stored in word or subword embeddings acquired by pretrained language models from the perspectives of token length, substrings, and token constitution. Additionally, we evaluated the ability of models to generate knowledge regarding token surfaces. We focused on 12 pretrained language models that were mainly trained on English and Japanese corpora. Experimental results demonstrate that pretrained Figure 1: Input and output examples when asking GPT-language models have knowledge regarding token 3.5 Turbo about the surface information of words (as length and substrings but not token constitution. of 1st, Jan. 2024). The Japanese example has the same Additionally, the results imply that there meaning as the English text, asking the length of and is a bottleneck on the decoder side in terms of third character in 人類学者 (anthropologist).