The rapid advancement and widespread use of large language models (LLMs) have raised significant concerns regarding the potential leakage of personally identifiable information (PII). These models are often trained on vast quantities of web-collected data, which may inadvertently include sensitive personal data. This paper presents ProPILE, a novel probing tool designed to empower data subjects, or the owners of the PII, with awareness of potential PII leakage in LLM-based services. ProPILE lets data subjects formulate prompts based on their own PII to evaluate the level of privacy intrusion in LLMs. We demonstrate its application on the OPT-1.3B

Large language model (LLM) performance on reasoning problems typically does not generalize out of distribution. Previous work has claimed that this can be mitigated with chain of thought prompting--a method of demonstrating solution procedures--with the intuition that it is possible to in-context teach an LLM an algorithm for solving the problem.This paper presents a case study of chain of thought on problems from Blocksworld, a classical planning domain, and examines the performance of two state-of-the-art LLMs across two axes: generality of examples given in prompt, and complexity of problems queried with each prompt. While our problems are very simple, we only find meaningful performance improvements from chain of thought prompts when those prompts are exceedingly specific to their problem class, and that those improvements quickly deteriorate as the size n of the query-specified stack grows past the size of stacks shown in the examples.We also create scalable variants of three domains commonly studied in previous CoT papers and demonstrate the existence of similar failure modes.Our results hint that, contrary to previous claims in the literature, CoT's performance improvements do not stem from the model learning general algorithmic procedures via demonstrations but depend on carefully engineering highly problem specific prompts. This spotlights drawbacks of chain of thought, especially the sharp tradeoff between possible performance gains and the amount of human labor necessary to generate examples with correct reasoning traces.

The flexible and generalized nature of large language models has allowed for their application in a wide array of language-based domains.Much like their human contemporaries, these models are capable of engaging in discussions and debates as a means of improving answer quality.We first take a theoretical approach to analyzing debate and provide a framework through which debate can be mathematically examined.Building on this framework, we provide several theoretical results for multi-agent debate.In particular, we demonstrate that similar model capabilities, or similar model responses, can result in static debate dynamics where the debate procedure simply converges to the majority opinion. When this majority opinion is the result of a common misconception (ingrained in the models through shared training data) debate is likely to converge to answers associated with that common misconception.Using insights from our theoretical results we then propose three interventions which improve the efficacy of debate. For each intervention, we provide theoretical results demonstrating how debate is improved.We also demonstrate that these interventions result in better performance on four common benchmark tasks.

Users typically engage with LLMs interactively, yet most existing benchmarks evaluate them in a static, single-turn format, posing reliability concerns in interactive scenarios. We identify a key obstacle towards reliability: LLMs are trained to answer any question, even with incomplete context or insufficient knowledge. In this paper, we propose to change the static paradigm to an interactive one, develop systems that proactively ask questions to gather more information and respond reliably, and introduce an benchmark--MEDIQ--to evaluate question-asking ability in LLMs. MEDIQ simulates clinical interactions consisting of a Patient System and an adaptive Expert System; with potentially incomplete initial information, the Expert refrains from making diagnostic decisions when unconfident, and instead elicits missing details via follow-up questions. We provide a pipeline to convert single-turn medical benchmarks into an interactive format. Our results show that directly prompting state-of-the-art LLMs to ask questions degrades performance, indicating that adapting LLMs to proactive information-seeking settings is nontrivial. We experiment with abstention strategies to better estimate model confidence and decide when to ask questions, improving diagnostic accuracy by 22.3%; however, performance still lags compared to an (unrealistic in practice) upper bound with complete information upfront. Further analyses show improved interactive performance with filtering irrelevant contexts and reformatting conversations. Overall, we introduce a novel problem towards LLM reliability, an interactive MEDIQ benchmark and a novel question-asking system, and highlight directions to extend LLMs' information-seeking abilities in critical domains.

Large language models (LLMs) and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have been proved to excel at multiple tasks, such as commonsense reasoning. Powerful as these models can be, they are not grounded in the 3D physical world, which involves richer concepts such as spatial relationships, affordances, physics, layout, and so on. In this work, we propose to inject the 3D world into large language models, and introduce a whole new family of 3D-LLMs. Specifically, 3D-LLMs can take 3D point clouds and their features as input and perform a diverse set of 3D-related tasks, including captioning, dense captioning, 3D question answering, task decomposition, 3Dgrounding, 3D-assisted dialog, navigation, and so on. Using three types of prompting mechanisms that we design, we are able to collect over 300k 3D-language data covering these tasks. To efficiently train 3D-LLMs, we first utilize a 3D feature extractor that obtains 3D features from rendered multi-view images. Then, we use 2D VLMs as our backbones to train our 3D-LLMs.

The ability to compare objects, scenes, or situations is crucial for effective decision-making and problem-solving in everyday life. For instance, comparing the freshness of apples enables better choices during grocery shopping, while comparing sofa designs helps optimize the aesthetics of our living space. Despite its significance, the comparative capability is largely unexplored in artificial general intelligence (AGI). In this paper, we introduce MLLM-CompBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate the comparative reasoning capability of multimodal large language models (MLLMs). MLLM-CompBench mines and pairs images through visually oriented questions covering eight dimensions of relative comparison: visual attribute, existence, state, emotion, temporality, spatiality, quantity, and quality.

Verbal and visual-spatial information processing are two critical subsystems that activate different brain regions and often collaborate together for cognitive reasoning. Despite the rapid advancement of LLM-based reasoning, the mainstream frameworks, such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and its variants, primarily focus on the verbal dimension, resulting in limitations in tackling reasoning problems with visual and spatial clues. To bridge the gap, we propose a novel dual-modality reasoning framework called Vision-Augmented Prompting (VAP).

We introduce ReXTime, a benchmark designed to rigorously test AI models' ability to perform temporal reasoning within video events.Specifically, ReXTime focuses on reasoning across time, i.e. human-like understanding when the question and its corresponding answer occur in different video segments. This form of reasoning, requiring advanced understanding of cause-and-effect relationships across video segments, poses significant challenges to even the frontier multimodal large language models. To facilitate this evaluation, we develop an automated pipeline for generating temporal reasoning question-answer pairs, significantly reducing the need for labor-intensive manual annotations. Our benchmark includes 921 carefully vetted validation samples and 2,143 test samples, each manually curated for accuracy and relevance. Evaluation results show that while frontier large language models outperform academic models, they still lag behind human performance by a significant 14.3\% accuracy gap. Additionally, our pipeline creates a training dataset of 9,695 machine generated samples without manual effort, which empirical studies suggest can enhance the across-time reasoning via fine-tuning.

Since developing a new multimodal LLM (MLLM) by pre-training on tremendous image-text pairs from scratch can be exceedingly resource-consuming, connecting an existing LLM with a comparatively lightweight visual prompt generator (VPG) becomes a feasible paradigm.

Existing Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) follow the paradigm that perceives visual information by aligning visual features with the input space of Large Language Models (LLMs) and concatenating visual tokens with text tokens to form a unified sequence input for LLMs. These methods demonstrate promising results on various vision-language tasks but are limited by the high computational effort due to the extended input sequence resulting from the involvement of visual tokens. In this paper, instead of input space alignment, we propose a novel parameter space alignment paradigm that represents visual information as model weights. For each input image, we use a vision encoder to extract visual features, convert features into perceptual weights, and merge the perceptual weights with LLM's weights. In this way, the input of LLM does not require visual tokens, which reduces the length of the input sequence and greatly improves efficiency. Following this paradigm, we propose VLoRA with the perceptual weights generator. The perceptual weights generator is designed to convert visual features to perceptual weights with low-rank property, exhibiting a form similar to LoRA. The experimental results show that our VLoRA achieves comparable performance on various benchmarks for MLLMs, while significantly reducing the computational costs for both training and inference.