The increasing capability of large language models (LLMs) to generate fluent long-form texts is presenting new challenges in distinguishing machine-generated outputs from human-written ones, which is crucial for ensuring authenticity and trustworthiness of expressions. Existing zero-shot detectors primarily focus on token-level distributions, which are vulnerable to real-world domain shifts, including different prompting and decoding strategies, and adversarial attacks. We propose a more robust method that incorporates abstract elements, such as event transitions, as key deciding factors to detect machine versus human texts by training a latent-space model on sequences of events or topics derived from human-written texts. In three different domains, machine-generated texts, which are originally inseparable from human texts on the token level, can be better distinguished with our latent-space model, leading to a 31% improvement over strong baselines such as DetectGPT. Our analysis further reveals that, unlike humans, modern LLMs like GPT-4 generate event triggers and their transitions differently, an inherent disparity that helps our method to robustly detect machine-generated texts.

This paper investigates the capability of LLMs in storytelling, focusing on narrative development and plot progression. We introduce a novel computational framework to analyze narratives through three discourse-level aspects: i) story arcs, ii) turning points, and iii) affective dimensions, including arousal and valence. By leveraging expert and automatic annotations, we uncover significant discrepancies between the LLM- and human- written stories. While human-written stories are suspenseful, arousing, and diverse in narrative structures, LLM stories are homogeneously positive and lack tension. Next, we measure narrative reasoning skills as a precursor to generative capacities, concluding that most LLMs fall short of human abilities in discourse understanding. Finally, we show that explicit integration of aforementioned discourse features can enhance storytelling, as is demonstrated by over 40% improvement in neural storytelling in terms of diversity, suspense, and arousal.

Automatic melody-to-lyric generation is a task in which song lyrics are generated to go with a given melody. It is of significant practical interest and more challenging than unconstrained lyric generation as the music imposes additional constraints onto the lyrics. The training data is limited as most songs are copyrighted, resulting in models that underfit the complicated cross-modal relationship between melody and lyrics. In this work, we propose a method for generating high-quality lyrics without training on any aligned melody-lyric data. Specifically, we design a hierarchical lyric generation framework that first generates a song outline and second the complete lyrics. The framework enables disentanglement of training (based purely on text) from inference (melody-guided text generation) to circumvent the shortage of parallel data. We leverage the segmentation and rhythm alignment between melody and lyrics to compile the given melody into decoding constraints as guidance during inference. The two-step hierarchical design also enables content control via the lyric outline, a much-desired feature for democratizing collaborative song creation. Experimental results show that our model can generate high-quality lyrics that are more on-topic, singable, intelligible, and coherent than strong baselines, for example SongMASS, a SOTA model trained on a parallel dataset, with a 24% relative overall quality improvement based on human ratings.

We explore the creative problem-solving capabilities of modern large language models (LLMs) in a constrained setting. The setting requires circumventing a cognitive bias known in psychology as ''functional fixedness'' to use familiar objects in innovative or unconventional ways. To this end, we create MacGyver, an automatically generated dataset consisting of 1,600 real-world problems that deliberately trigger functional fixedness and require thinking 'out-of-the-box'. We then present our collection of problems to both LLMs and humans to compare and contrast their problem-solving abilities. We show that MacGyver is challenging for both groups, but in unique and complementary ways. For example, humans typically excel in solving problems that they are familiar with but may struggle with tasks requiring domain-specific knowledge, leading to a higher variance. On the other hand, LLMs, being exposed to a variety of highly specialized knowledge, attempt broader problems but are prone to overconfidence and propose actions that are physically infeasible or inefficient. We also provide a detailed error analysis of LLMs, and demonstrate the potential of enhancing their problem-solving ability with novel prompting techniques such as iterative step-wise reflection and divergent-convergent thinking. This work provides insight into the creative problem-solving capabilities of humans and AI and illustrates how psychological paradigms can be extended into large-scale tasks for comparing humans and machines.

Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-3 have demonstrated a strong capability to generate coherent and contextually relevant text. However, amidst their successes, a crucial issue persists: their generated outputs still lack commonsense at times. Moreover, fine-tuning the entire LLM towards more commonsensical outputs is computationally expensive if not infeasible. In this paper, we present a computation-efficient framework that steers a frozen Pre-Trained Language Model (PTLM) towards more commonsensical generation (i.e., producing a plausible output that incorporates a list of concepts in a meaningful way). Specifically, we first construct a reference-free evaluator that assigns a sentence with a commonsensical score by grounding the sentence to a dynamic commonsense knowledge base from four different relational aspects. We then use the scorer as the oracle for commonsense knowledge, and extend the controllable generation method called NADO to train an auxiliary head that guides a fixed PTLM to better satisfy the oracle. We test our framework on a series of GPT-2-, Flan-T5-, and Alpaca-based language models (LMs) on two constrained concept-to-sentence benchmarks. Human evaluation results demonstrate that our method consistently leads to the most commonsensical outputs.

While recent studies have looked into the abilities of large language models in various benchmark tasks, including question generation, reading comprehension, multilingual and etc, there have been few studies looking into the controllability of large language models on generation tasks. We present an extensive analysis of various benchmarks including a sentence planning benchmark with different granularities. After comparing large language models against state-of-the-start finetuned smaller models, we present a spectrum showing large language models falling behind, are comparable, or exceed the ability of smaller models. We conclude that **large language models struggle at meeting fine-grained hard constraints**.

Automatic song writing is a topic of significant practical interest. However, its research is largely hindered by the lack of training data due to copyright concerns and challenged by its creative nature. Most noticeably, prior works often fall short of modeling the cross-modal correlation between melody and lyrics due to limited parallel data, hence generating lyrics that are less singable. Existing works also lack effective mechanisms for content control, a much desired feature for democratizing song creation for people with limited music background. In this work, we propose to generate pleasantly listenable lyrics without training on melody-lyric aligned data. Instead, we design a hierarchical lyric generation framework that disentangles training (based purely on text) from inference (melody-guided text generation). At inference time, we leverage the crucial alignments between melody and lyrics and compile the given melody into constraints to guide the generation process. Evaluation results show that our model can generate high-quality lyrics that are more singable, intelligible, coherent, and in rhyme than strong baselines including those supervised on parallel data.

A hyperbole is an intentional and creative exaggeration not to be taken literally. Despite its ubiquity in daily life, the computational explorations of hyperboles are scarce. In this paper, we tackle the under-explored and challenging task: sentence-level hyperbole generation. We start with a representative syntactic pattern for intensification and systematically study the semantic (commonsense and counterfactual) relationships between each component in such hyperboles. Next, we leverage the COMeT and reverse COMeT models to do commonsense and counterfactual inference. We then generate multiple hyperbole candidates based on our findings from the pattern, and train neural classifiers to rank and select high-quality hyperboles. Automatic and human evaluations show that our generation method is able to generate hyperboles creatively with high success rate and intensity scores.

Understanding cross-cultural differences is an important application of natural language understanding. This problem is difficult due to the relativism between cultures. We present a computational approach to learn cultural models that encode the general opinions and values of cultures from multi-lingual Wikipedia. Specifically, we assume a language is a symbol of a culture and different languages represent different cultures. Our model can automatically identify statements that potentially reflect cultural differences. Experiments on English and Chinese languages show that on a held out set of diverse topics, including marriage, gun control, democracy, etc., our model achieves high correlation with human judgements regarding within-culture values and cultural differences.