Introduction: With the rapid advances in large language models (LLMs), there have been numerous new open source as well as commercial models. While recent publications have explored GPT-4 in its application to extracting information of interest from radiology reports, there has not been a real-world comparison of GPT-4 to different leading open-source models. Materials and Methods: Two different and independent datasets were used. The first dataset consists of 540 chest x-ray reports that were created at the Massachusetts General Hospital between July 2019 and July 2021. The second dataset consists of 500 chest x-ray reports from the ImaGenome dataset. We then compared the commercial models GPT-3.5 Turbo and GPT-4 from OpenAI to the open-source models Mistral-7B, Mixtral-8x7B, Llama2-13B, Llama2-70B, QWEN1.5-72B and CheXbert and CheXpert-labeler in their ability to accurately label the presence of multiple findings in x-ray text reports using different prompting techniques. Results: On the ImaGenome dataset, the best performing open-source model was Llama2-70B with micro F1-scores of 0.972 and 0.970 for zero- and few-shot prompts, respectively. GPT-4 achieved micro F1-scores of 0.975 and 0.984, respectively. On the institutional dataset, the best performing open-source model was QWEN1.5-72B with micro F1-scores of 0.952 and 0.965 for zero- and few-shot prompting, respectively. GPT-4 achieved micro F1-scores of 0.975 and 0.973, respectively. Conclusion: In this paper, we show that while GPT-4 is superior to open-source models in zero-shot report labeling, the implementation of few-shot prompting can bring open-source models on par with GPT-4. This shows that open-source models could be a performant and privacy preserving alternative to GPT-4 for the task of radiology report classification.

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) have gained rapid popularity through publicly available tools such as ChatGPT. The adoption of LLMs for personal and professional use is fueled by the natural interactions between human users and computer applications such as ChatGPT, along with powerful summarization and text generation capabilities. Given the widespread use of such generative AI tools, in this work we investigate how these tools can be deployed in a non-safety critical, strategic traffic flow management setting. Specifically, we train an LLM, CHATATC, based on a large historical data set of Ground Delay Program (GDP) issuances, spanning 2000-2023 and consisting of over 80,000 GDP implementations, revisions, and cancellations. We test the query and response capabilities of CHATATC, documenting successes (e.g., providing correct GDP rates, durations, and reason) and shortcomings (e.g,. superlative questions). We also detail the design of a graphical user interface for future users to interact and collaborate with the CHATATC conversational agent.

In 2023, we are using the latest models of GPT-4 to advance program synthesis. The large language models have significantly improved the state-of-the-art for this purpose. To make these advancements more accessible, we have created a repository that connects these models to Huamn Eval. This dataset was initally developed to be used with a language model called CODEGEN on natural and programming language data. The utility of these trained models is showcased by demonstrating their competitive performance in zero-shot Python code generation on HumanEval tasks compared to previous state-of-the-art solutions. Additionally, this gives way to developing more multi-step paradigm synthesis. This benchmark features 160 diverse problem sets factorized into multistep prompts that our analysis shows significantly improves program synthesis over single-turn inputs. All code is open source at https://github.com/daniel442li/gpt-human-eval .

Pre-trained language models (LMs) are capable of in-context learning (ICL): they can adapt to a task with only a few examples given in the prompt without any parameter update. However, it is unclear where this capability comes from as there is a stark distribution shift between pre-training text and ICL prompts. In this work, we study what patterns of the pre-training data contribute to ICL. We find that LMs' ICL ability depends on $\textit{parallel structures}$ in the pre-training data -- pairs of phrases following similar templates in the same context window. Specifically, we detect parallel structures by checking whether training on one phrase improves prediction of the other, and conduct ablation experiments to study their effect on ICL. We show that removing parallel structures in the pre-training data reduces LMs' ICL accuracy by 51% (vs 2% from random ablation). This drop persists even when excluding common patterns such as n-gram repetitions and long-range dependency, showing the diversity and generality of parallel structures. A closer look at the detected parallel structures indicates that they cover diverse linguistic tasks and span long distances in the data.

The emerging success of large language models (LLMs) heavily relies on collecting abundant training data from external (untrusted) sources. Despite substantial efforts devoted to data cleaning and curation, well-constructed LLMs have been reported to suffer from copyright infringement, data poisoning, and/or privacy violations, which would impede practical deployment of LLMs. In this study, we propose a simple and easily implementable method for purifying LLMs from the negative effects caused by uncurated data, namely, through ensembling LLMs with benign and small language models (SLMs). Aside from theoretical guarantees, we perform comprehensive experiments to empirically confirm the efficacy of ensembling LLMs with SLMs, which can effectively preserve the performance of LLMs while mitigating issues such as copyright infringement, data poisoning, and privacy violations.

Queer youth face increased mental health risks, such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. Hindered by negative stigma, they often avoid seeking help and rely on online resources, which may provide incompatible information. Although access to a supportive environment and reliable information is invaluable, many queer youth worldwide have no access to such support. However, this could soon change due to the rapid adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT. This paper aims to comprehensively explore the potential of LLMs to revolutionize emotional support for queers. To this end, we conduct a qualitative and quantitative analysis of LLM's interactions with queer-related content. To evaluate response quality, we develop a novel ten-question scale that is inspired by psychological standards and expert input. We apply this scale to score several LLMs and human comments to posts where queer youth seek advice and share experiences. We find that LLM responses are supportive and inclusive, outscoring humans. However, they tend to be generic, not empathetic enough, and lack personalization, resulting in nonreliable and potentially harmful advice. We discuss these challenges, demonstrate that a dedicated prompt can improve the performance, and propose a blueprint of an LLM-supporter that actively (but sensitively) seeks user context to provide personalized, empathetic, and reliable responses. Our annotated dataset is available for further research.

Autonomous driving (AD) technology, leveraging artificial intelligence, strives for vehicle automation. End-toend strategies, emerging to simplify traditional driving systems by integrating perception, decision-making, and control, offer new avenues for advanced driving functionalities. Despite their potential, current challenges include data efficiency, training complexities, and poor generalization. This study addresses these issues with a novel end-to-end AD training model, enhancing system adaptability and intelligence. The model incorporates a Transformer module into the policy network, undergoing initial behavior cloning (BC) pre-training for update gradients. Subsequently, fine-tuning through reinforcement learning with human guidance (RLHG) adapts the model to specific driving environments, aiming to surpass the performance limits of imitation learning (IL). The fine-tuning process involves human interactions, guiding the model to acquire more efficient and safer driving behaviors through supervision, intervention, demonstration, and reward feedback. Simulation results demonstrate that this framework accelerates learning, achieving precise control and significantly enhancing safety and reliability. Compared to other advanced baseline methods, the proposed approach excels in challenging AD tasks. The introduction of the Transformer module and human-guided fine-tuning provides valuable insights and methods for research and applications in the AD field.

Distorted science communication harms individuals and society as it can lead to unhealthy behavior change and decrease trust in scientific institutions. Given the rapidly increasing volume of science communication in recent years, a fine-grained understanding of how findings from scientific publications are reported to the general public, and methods to detect distortions from the original work automatically, are crucial. Prior work focused on individual aspects of distortions or worked with unpaired data. In this work, we make three foundational contributions towards addressing this problem: (1) annotating 1,600 instances of scientific findings from academic papers paired with corresponding findings as reported in news articles and tweets wrt. four characteristics: causality, certainty, generality and sensationalism; (2) establishing baselines for automatically detecting these characteristics; and (3) analyzing the prevalence of changes in these characteristics in both human-annotated and large-scale unlabeled data. Our results show that scientific findings frequently undergo subtle distortions when reported. Tweets distort findings more often than science news reports. Detecting fine-grained distortions automatically poses a challenging task. In our experiments, fine-tuned task-specific models consistently outperform few-shot LLM prompting.

Bias benchmarks are a popular method for studying the negative impacts of bias in LLMs, yet there has been little empirical investigation of whether these benchmarks are actually indicative of how real world harm may manifest in the real world. In this work, we study the correspondence between such decontextualized "trick tests" and evaluations that are more grounded in Realistic Use and Tangible {Effects (i.e. RUTEd evaluations). We explore this correlation in the context of gender-occupation bias--a popular genre of bias evaluation. We compare three de-contextualized evaluations adapted from the current literature to three analogous RUTEd evaluations applied to long-form content generation. We conduct each evaluation for seven instruction-tuned LLMs. For the RUTEd evaluations, we conduct repeated trials of three text generation tasks: children's bedtime stories, user personas, and English language learning exercises. We found no correspondence between trick tests and RUTEd evaluations. Specifically, selecting the least biased model based on the de-contextualized results coincides with selecting the model with the best performance on RUTEd evaluations only as often as random chance. We conclude that evaluations that are not based in realistic use are likely insufficient to mitigate and assess bias and real-world harms.

Graphs data is crucial for many applications, and much of it exists in the relations described in textual format. As a result, being able to accurately recall and encode a graph described in earlier text is a basic yet pivotal ability that LLMs need to demonstrate if they are to perform reasoning tasks that involve graph-structured information. Human performance at graph recall has been studied by cognitive scientists for decades, and has been found to often exhibit certain structural patterns of bias that align with human handling of social relationships. To date, however, we know little about how LLMs behave in analogous graph recall tasks: do their recalled graphs also exhibit certain biased patterns, and if so, how do they compare with humans and affect other graph reasoning tasks? In this work, we perform the first systematical study of graph recall by LLMs, investigating the accuracy and biased microstructures (local structural patterns) in their recall. We find that LLMs not only underperform often in graph recall, but also tend to favor more triangles and alternating 2-paths. Moreover, we find that more advanced LLMs have a striking dependence on the domain that a real-world graph comes from -- by yielding the best recall accuracy when the graph is narrated in a language style consistent with its original domain.