The notable success of large language models (LLMs) has sparked an upsurge in building language agents to complete various complex tasks. We present AMOR, an agent framework based on open-source LLMs, which reasons with external knowledge bases and adapts to specific domains through human supervision to the reasoning process. AMOR builds reasoning logic over a finite state machine (FSM) that solves problems through autonomous executions and transitions over disentangled modules. This allows humans to provide direct feedback to the individual modules, and thus naturally forms process supervision. Based on this reasoning and feedback framework, we develop AMOR through two-stage fine-tuning: warm-up and adaptation. The former fine-tunes the LLM with examples automatically constructed from various public datasets and enables AMOR to generalize across different knowledge environments, while the latter tailors AMOR to specific domains using process feedback. Extensive experiments across multiple domains demonstrate the advantage of AMOR to strong baselines, thanks to its FSM-based reasoning and process feedback mechanism.

In practical statistical causal discovery (SCD), embedding domain expert knowledge as constraints into the algorithm is widely accepted as significant for creating consistent meaningful causal models, despite the recognized challenges in systematic acquisition of the background knowledge. To overcome these challenges, this paper proposes a novel methodology for causal inference, in which SCD methods and knowledge based causal inference (KBCI) with a large language model (LLM) are synthesized through "statistical causal prompting (SCP)" for LLMs and prior knowledge augmentation for SCD. Experiments have revealed that GPT-4 can cause the output of the LLM-KBCI and the SCD result with prior knowledge from LLM-KBCI to approach the ground truth, and that the SCD result can be further improved, if GPT-4 undergoes SCP. Furthermore, it has been clarified that an LLM can improve SCD with its background knowledge, even if the LLM does not contain information on the dataset. The proposed approach can thus address challenges such as dataset biases and limitations, illustrating the potential of LLMs to improve data-driven causal inference across diverse scientific domains.

Factual knowledge encoded in Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) enriches their representations and justifies their use as knowledge bases. Previous work has focused on probing PLMs for factual knowledge by measuring how often they can correctly predict an object entity given a subject and a relation, and improving fact retrieval by optimizing the prompts used for querying PLMs. In this work, we consider a complementary aspect, namely the coherency of factual knowledge in PLMs, i.e., how often can PLMs predict the subject entity given its initial prediction of the object entity. This goes beyond evaluating how much PLMs know, and focuses on the internal state of knowledge inside them. Our results indicate that PLMs have low coherency using manually written, optimized and paraphrased prompts, but including an evidence paragraph leads to substantial improvement. This shows that PLMs fail to model inverse relations and need further enhancements to be able to handle retrieving facts from their parameters in a coherent manner, and to be considered as knowledge bases.

In recent years, Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved significant success in natural language processing (NLP) and various interdisciplinary areas. However, applying LLMs to chemistry is a complex task that requires specialized domain knowledge. This paper provides a thorough exploration of the nuanced methodologies employed in integrating LLMs into the field of chemistry, delving into the complexities and innovations at this interdisciplinary juncture. Specifically, our analysis begins with examining how molecular information is fed into LLMs through various representation and tokenization methods. We then categorize chemical LLMs into three distinct groups based on the domain and modality of their input data, and discuss approaches for integrating these inputs for LLMs. Furthermore, this paper delves into the pretraining objectives with adaptations to chemical LLMs. After that, we explore the diverse applications of LLMs in chemistry, including novel paradigms for their application in chemistry tasks. Finally, we identify promising research directions, including further integration with chemical knowledge, advancements in continual learning, and improvements in model interpretability, paving the way for groundbreaking developments in the field.

Evaluating natural language generation (NLG) is a vital but challenging problem in artificial intelligence. Traditional evaluation metrics mainly capturing content (e.g. n-gram) overlap between system outputs and references are far from satisfactory, and large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have demonstrated great potential in NLG evaluation in recent years. Various automatic evaluation methods based on LLMs have been proposed, including metrics derived from LLMs, prompting LLMs, and fine-tuning LLMs with labeled evaluation data. In this survey, we first give a taxonomy of LLM-based NLG evaluation methods, and discuss their pros and cons, respectively. We also discuss human-LLM collaboration for NLG evaluation. Lastly, we discuss several open problems in this area and point out future research directions.

Pre-trained language models (LMs) perform well in In-Topic setups, where training and testing data come from the same topics. However, they face challenges in Cross-Topic scenarios where testing data is derived from distinct topics -- such as Gun Control. This study analyzes various LMs with three probing-based experiments to shed light on the reasons behind the In- vs. Cross-Topic generalization gap. Thereby, we demonstrate, for the first time, that generalization gaps and the robustness of the embedding space vary significantly across LMs. Additionally, we assess larger LMs and underscore the relevance of our analysis for recent models. Overall, diverse pre-training objectives, architectural regularization, or data deduplication contribute to more robust LMs and diminish generalization gaps. Our research contributes to a deeper understanding and comparison of language models across different generalization scenarios.

There is an intricate relation between the properties of an image and how humans behave while describing the image. This behavior shows ample variation, as manifested in human signals such as eye movements and when humans start to describe the image. Despite the value of such signals of visuo-linguistic variation, they are virtually disregarded in the training of current pretrained models, which motivates further investigation. Using a corpus of Dutch image descriptions with concurrently collected eye-tracking data, we explore the nature of the variation in visuo-linguistic signals, and find that they correlate with each other. Given this result, we hypothesize that variation stems partly from the properties of the images, and explore whether image representations encoded by pretrained vision encoders can capture such variation. Our results indicate that pretrained models do so to a weak-to-moderate degree, suggesting that the models lack biases about what makes a stimulus complex for humans and what leads to variations in human outputs.

In the field of natural language processing (NLP), Large Language Models (LLMs) have precipitated a paradigm shift, markedly enhancing performance in natural language generation tasks. Despite these advancements, the comprehensive evaluation of LLMs remains an inevitable challenge for the community. Recently, the utilization of Multiple Choice Question Answering (MCQA) as a benchmark for LLMs has gained considerable traction. This study investigates the rationality of MCQA as an evaluation method for LLMs. If LLMs genuinely understand the semantics of questions, their performance should exhibit consistency across the varied configurations derived from the same questions. Contrary to this expectation, our empirical findings suggest a notable disparity in the consistency of LLM responses, which we define as REsponse VAriability Syndrome (REVAS) of the LLMs, indicating that current MCQA-based benchmarks may not adequately capture the true capabilities of LLMs, which underscores the need for more robust evaluation mechanisms in assessing the performance of LLMs.

Kahneman & Tversky's prospect theory tells us that humans perceive random variables in a biased To understand why these alignment methods work so well, but well-defined manner (1992); for example, humans and whether feedback needs to be in the form of preferences, are famously loss-averse. We show that we frame them through the lens of prospect theory objectives for aligning LLMs with human feedback (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979; Tversky & Kahneman, implicitly incorporate many of these biases-- 1992). Prospect theory explains why humans make decisions the success of these objectives (e.g., DPO) over about uncertain events that do not maximize expected cross-entropy minimization can partly be ascribed value. It formalizes how humans perceive random variables to them being human-aware loss functions (HAin a biased but well-defined manner; for example, relative to LOs). However, the utility functions these methods some reference point, humans are more sensitive to losses attribute to humans still differ from those in than gains, a property called loss aversion. We show that the prospect theory literature. Using a Kahneman-popular alignment methods such as PPO (Schulman et al., Tversky model of human utility, we propose a 2017), DPO (Rafailov et al., 2023), and SLiC (Zhao et al., HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations 2023) implicitly model such biases, helping explain their instead of maximizing the log-likelihood success independently of the data used. For this reason, we of preferences, as current methods do. We call call them human-aware loss functions (HALOs).

The evolution from Large Language Models (LLMs) to Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) has spurred research into extending In-Context Learning (ICL) to its multimodal counterpart. Existing such studies have primarily concentrated on image-to-text ICL. However, the Text-to-Image ICL (T2I-ICL), with its unique characteristics and potential applications, remains underexplored. To address this gap, we formally define the task of T2I-ICL and present CoBSAT, the first T2I-ICL benchmark dataset, encompassing ten tasks. Utilizing our dataset to benchmark six state-of-the-art MLLMs, we uncover considerable difficulties MLLMs encounter in solving T2I-ICL. We identify the primary challenges as the inherent complexity of multimodality and image generation. To overcome these challenges, we explore strategies like fine-tuning and Chain-of-Thought prompting, demonstrating notable improvements. Our code and dataset are available at \url{https://github.com/UW-Madison-Lee-Lab/CoBSAT}.