Generative language models, such as ChatGPT, have garnered attention for their ability to generate human-like writing in various fields, including academic research. The rapid proliferation of generated texts has bolstered the need for automatic identification to uphold transparency and trust in the information. However, these generated texts closely resemble human writing and often have subtle differences in the grammatical structure, tones, and patterns, which makes systematic scrutinization challenging. In this work, we attempt to detect the Abstracts generated by ChatGPT, which are much shorter in length and bounded. We extract the texts semantic and lexical properties and observe that traditional machine learning models can confidently detect these Abstracts.

A number of tasks have been proposed recently to facilitate easy access to charts such as chart QA and summarization. The dominant paradigm to solve these tasks has been to fine-tune a pretrained model on the task data. However, this approach is not only expensive but also not generalizable to unseen tasks. On the other hand, large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive generalization capabilities to unseen tasks with zero- or few-shot prompting. However, their application to chart-related tasks is not trivial as these tasks typically involve considering not only the underlying data but also the visual features in the chart image. We propose PromptChart, a multimodal few-shot prompting framework with LLMs for chart-related applications. By analyzing the tasks carefully, we have come up with a set of prompting guidelines for each task to elicit the best few-shot performance from LLMs. We further propose a strategy to inject visual information into the prompts. Our experiments on three different chart-related information consumption tasks show that with properly designed prompts LLMs can excel on the benchmarks, achieving state-of-the-art.

To reduce the computation cost and the energy consumption in large language models (LLM), skimming-based acceleration dynamically drops unimportant tokens of the input sequence progressively along layers of the LLM while preserving the tokens of semantic importance. However, our work for the first time reveals the acceleration may be vulnerable to Denial-of-Service (DoS) attacks. In this paper, we propose No-Skim, a general framework to help the owners of skimming-based LLM to understand and measure the robustness of their acceleration scheme. Specifically, our framework searches minimal and unnoticeable perturbations at character-level and token-level to generate adversarial inputs that sufficiently increase the remaining token ratio, thus increasing the computation cost and energy consumption. We systematically evaluate the vulnerability of the skimming acceleration in various LLM architectures including BERT and RoBERTa on the GLUE benchmark. In the worst case, the perturbation found by No-Skim substantially increases the running cost of LLM by over 145% on average. Moreover, No-Skim extends the evaluation framework to various scenarios, making the evaluation conductible with different level of knowledge.

While neural fields have made significant strides in view synthesis and scene reconstruction, editing them poses a formidable challenge due to their implicit encoding of geometry and texture information from multi-view inputs. In this paper, we introduce \textsc{LatentEditor}, an innovative framework designed to empower users with the ability to perform precise and locally controlled editing of neural fields using text prompts. Leveraging denoising diffusion models, we successfully embed real-world scenes into the latent space, resulting in a faster and more adaptable NeRF backbone for editing compared to traditional methods. To enhance editing precision, we introduce a delta score to calculate the 2D mask in the latent space that serves as a guide for local modifications while preserving irrelevant regions. Our novel pixel-level scoring approach harnesses the power of InstructPix2Pix (IP2P) to discern the disparity between IP2P conditional and unconditional noise predictions in the latent space. The edited latents conditioned on the 2D masks are then iteratively updated in the training set to achieve 3D local editing. Our approach achieves faster editing speeds and superior output quality compared to existing 3D editing models, bridging the gap between textual instructions and high-quality 3D scene editing in latent space. We show the superiority of our approach on four benchmark 3D datasets, LLFF, IN2N, NeRFStudio and NeRF-Art.

Recently, the evaluation of Large Language Models has emerged as a popular area of research. The three crucial questions for LLM evaluation are ``what, where, and how to evaluate''. However, the existing research mainly focuses on the first two questions, which are basically what tasks to give the LLM during testing and what kind of knowledge it should deal with. As for the third question, which is about what standards to use, the types of evaluators, how to score, and how to rank, there hasn't been much discussion. In this paper, we analyze evaluation methods by comparing various criteria with both manual and automatic evaluation, utilizing onsite, crowd-sourcing, public annotators and GPT-4, with different scoring methods and ranking systems. We propose a new dataset, LLMEval and conduct evaluations on 20 LLMs. A total of 2,186 individuals participated, leading to the generation of 243,337 manual annotations and 57,511 automatic evaluation results. We perform comparisons and analyses of different settings and conduct 10 conclusions that can provide some insights for evaluating LLM in the future. The dataset and the results are publicly available at https://github.com/llmeval .

Through additional training, we explore embedding specialized scientific knowledge into the Llama 2 Large Language Model (LLM). Key findings reveal that effective knowledge integration requires reading texts from multiple perspectives, especially in instructional formats. We utilize text augmentation to tackle the scarcity of specialized texts, including style conversions and translations. Hyperparameter optimization proves crucial, with different size models (7b, 13b, and 70b) reasonably undergoing additional training. Validating our methods, we construct a dataset of 65,000 scientific papers. Although we have succeeded in partially embedding knowledge, the study highlights the complexities and limitations of incorporating specialized information into LLMs, suggesting areas for further improvement.

Objective: Information retrieval (IR, also known as search) systems are ubiquitous in modern times. How does the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI), based on large language models (LLMs), fit into the IR process? Process: This perspective explores the use of generative AI in the context of the motivations, considerations, and outcomes of the IR process with a focus on the academic use of such systems. Conclusions: There are many information needs, from simple to complex, that motivate use of IR. Users of such systems, particularly academics, have concerns for authoritativeness, timeliness, and contextualization of search. While LLMs may provide functionality that aids the IR process, the continued need for search systems, and research into their improvement, remains essential.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become valuable assets in mental health, showing promise in both classification tasks and counseling applications. This paper offers a perspective on using LLMs in mental health applications. It discusses the instability of generative models for prediction and the potential for generating hallucinatory outputs, underscoring the need for ongoing audits and evaluations to maintain their reliability and dependability. The paper also distinguishes between the often interchangeable terms ``explainability'' and ``interpretability'', advocating for developing inherently interpretable methods instead of relying on potentially hallucinated self-explanations generated by LLMs. Despite the advancements in LLMs, human counselors' empathetic understanding, nuanced interpretation, and contextual awareness remain irreplaceable in the sensitive and complex realm of mental health counseling. The use of LLMs should be approached with a judicious and considerate mindset, viewing them as tools that complement human expertise rather than seeking to replace it.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in general natural language processing tasks but often fall short in complex reasoning tasks. Recent studies have explored human-like problem-solving strategies, such as self-correct, to push further the boundary of single-model reasoning ability. In this work, we let a single model "step outside the box" by engaging multiple models to correct each other. We introduce a multi-agent collaboration strategy that emulates the academic peer review process. Each agent independently constructs its own solution, provides reviews on the solutions of others, and assigns confidence levels to its reviews. Upon receiving peer reviews, agents revise their initial solutions. Extensive experiments on three different types of reasoning tasks show that our collaboration approach delivers superior accuracy across all ten datasets compared to existing methods. Further study underscores the effectiveness of integrating confidence in reviews, demonstrates the superiority of feedback exchange over mere solution sharing, and highlights the role of capability and diversity in fostering successful collaboration.

As AI systems become more intelligent and their behavior becomes more challenging to assess, they may learn to game the flaws of human feedback instead of genuinely striving to follow instructions; however, this risk can be mitigated by controlling how LLMs generalize human feedback to situations where it is unreliable. To better understand how reward models generalize, we craft 69 distribution shifts spanning 8 categories. We find that reward models do not learn to evaluate `instruction-following' by default and instead favor personas that resemble internet text. Techniques for interpreting reward models' internal representations achieve better generalization than standard fine-tuning, but still frequently fail to distinguish instruction-following from conflated behaviors. We consolidate the 15 most challenging distribution shifts into the GENeralization analogIES (GENIES) benchmark, which we hope will enable progress toward controlling reward model generalization.