Recent advancements in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have greatly improved their abilities in image understanding. However, these models often struggle with grasping pixel-level semantic details, e.g., the keypoints of an object. To bridge this gap, we introduce the novel challenge of Semantic Keypoint Comprehension, which aims to comprehend keypoints across different task scenarios, including keypoint semantic understanding, visual prompt-based keypoint detection, and textual prompt-based keypoint detection. Moreover, we introduce KptLLM, a unified multimodal model that utilizes an identify-then-detect strategy to effectively address these challenges. KptLLM underscores the initial discernment of semantics in keypoints, followed by the precise determination of their positions through a chain-of-thought process. With several carefully designed modules, KptLLM adeptly handles various modality inputs, facilitating the interpretation of both semantic contents and keypoint locations. Our extensive experiments demonstrate KptLLM's superiority in various keypoint detection benchmarks and its unique semantic capabilities in interpreting keypoints.

This paper investigates simple bilevel optimization problems where we minimize an upper-level objective over the optimal solution set of a convex lower-level objective. Existing methods for such problems either only guarantee asymptotic convergence, have slow sublinear rates, or require strong assumptions. To address these challenges, we propose a penalization framework that delineates the relationship between approximate solutions of the original problem and its reformulated counterparts.

One way to address safety risks from large language models (LLMs) is to censor dangerous knowledge from their training data. While this removes the explicit information, implicit information can remain scattered across various training documents. Could an LLM infer the censored knowledge by piecing together these implicit hints? As a step towards answering this question, we study inductive out-of-context reasoning (OOCR), a type of generalization in which LLMs infer latent information from evidence distributed across training documents and apply it to downstream tasks without in-context learning. Using a suite of five tasks, we demonstrate that frontier LLMs can perform inductive OOCR. In one experiment we finetune an LLM on a corpus consisting only of distances between an unknown city and other known cities. Remarkably, without in-context examples or Chain of Thought, the LLM can verbalize that the unknown city is Paris and use this fact to answer downstream questions. Further experiments show that LLMs trained only on individual coin flip outcomes can verbalize whether the coin is biased, and those trained only on pairs (x, f(x)) can articulate a definition of f and compute inverses. While OOCR succeeds in a range of cases, we also show that it is unreliable, particularly for smaller LLMs learning complex structures. Overall, the ability of LLMs to "connect the dots" without explicit in-context learning poses a potential obstacle to monitoring and controlling the knowledge acquired by LLMs.

Current benchmarks for assessing vision-language models (VLMs) often focus on their perception or problem-solving capabilities and neglect other critical aspects such as fairness, multilinguality, or toxicity. Furthermore, they differ in their evaluation procedures and the scope of the evaluation, making it difficult to compare models. To address these issues, we extend the HELM framework to VLMs to present the Holistic Evaluation of Vision Language Models (VHELM). VHELM aggregates various datasets to cover one or more of the 9 aspects: visual perception, knowledge, reasoning, bias, fairness, multilinguality, robustness, toxicity, and safety. In doing so, we produce a comprehensive, multi-dimensional view of the capabilities of the VLMs across these important factors.

Although pre-trained transformers and reprogrammed text-based LLMs have shown strong performance on time series tasks, the best-performing architectures vary widely across tasks, with most models narrowly focused on specific areas, such as time series forecasting. Unifying predictive and generative time series tasks within a single model remains challenging.

Causality-based recommendation systems focus on the causal effects of user-item interactions resulting from item exposure (i.e., which items are recommended or exposed to the user), as opposed to conventional correlation-based recommendation. They are gaining popularity due to their multi-sided benefits to users, sellers and platforms alike. However, existing causality-based recommendation methods require additional input in the form of exposure data and/or propensity scores (i.e., the probability of exposure) for training. Such data, crucial for modeling causality in recommendation, are often not available in real-world situations due to technical or privacy constraints.

In modern chip design, placement aims at placing millions of circuit modules, which is an essential step that significantly influences power, performance, and area (PPA) metrics. Recently, reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a promising technique for improving placement quality, especially macro placement. However, current RL-based placement methods suffer from long training times, low generalization ability, and inability to guarantee PPA results. A key issue lies in the problem formulation, i.e., using RL to place from scratch, which results in limits useful information and inaccurate rewards during the training process. In this work, we propose an approach that utilizes RL for the refinement stage, which allows the RL policy to learn how to adjust existing placement layouts, thereby receiving sufficient information for the policy to act and obtain relatively dense and precise rewards.

Foundation models are applied in a broad spectrum of settings with different inference constraints, from massive multi-accelerator clusters to resource-constrained standalone mobile devices. However, the substantial costs associated with training these models often limit the number of unique model sizes that can be offered. Consequently, practitioners are compelled to select a model that may not be optimally aligned with their specific latency and cost requirements.