We investigate an efficient teaching algorithm that adaptively picks these contrastive examples.

We study the problem of active learning with the added twist that the learner is assisted by a helpful teacher. We consider the following natural interaction protocol: At each round, the learner proposes a query asking for the label of an instance $x^q$, the teacher provides the requested label $\{x^q, y^q\}$ along with explanatory information to guide the learning process. In this paper, we view this information in the form of an additional contrastive example ($\{x^c, y^c\}$) where $x^c$ is picked from a set constrained by $x^q$ (e.g., dissimilar instances with the same label). Our focus is to design a teaching algorithm that can provide an informative sequence of contrastive examples to the learner to speed up the learning process. We show that this leads to a challenging sequence optimization problem where the algorithm's choices at a given round depend on the history of interactions. We investigate an efficient teaching algorithm that adaptively picks these contrastive examples. We derive strong performance guarantees for our algorithm based on two problem-dependent parameters and further show that for specific types of active learners (e.g., a generalized binary search learner), the proposed teaching algorithm exhibits strong approximation guarantees. Finally, we illustrate our bounds and demonstrate the effectiveness of our teaching framework via two numerical case studies.

We investigate an efficient teaching algorithm that adaptively picks these contrastive examples.

Machine learning can greatly benefit from providing learning algorithms with pairs of contrastive training examples -- typically pairs of instances that differ only slightly, yet have different class labels. Intuitively, the difference in the instances helps explain the difference in the class labels. This paper proposes a theoretical framework in which the effect of various types of contrastive examples on active learners is studied formally. The focus is on the sample complexity of learning concept classes and how it is influenced by the choice of contrastive examples. We illustrate our results with geometric concept classes and classes of Boolean functions. Interestingly, we reveal a connection between learning from contrastive examples and the classical model of self-directed learning.

Personalization with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) often fails to capture fine-grained features of authors, making it hard to identify their unique traits. To enrich the RAG context, we propose providing Large Language Models (LLMs) with author-specific features, such as average sentiment polarity and frequently used words, in addition to past samples from the author's profile. We introduce a new feature called Contrastive Examples: documents from other authors are retrieved to help LLM identify what makes an author's style unique in comparison to others. Our experiments show that adding a couple of sentences about the named entities, dependency patterns, and words a person uses frequently significantly improves personalized text generation. Combining features with contrastive examples boosts the performance further, achieving a relative 15% improvement over baseline RAG while outperforming the benchmarks. Our results show the value of fine-grained features for better personalization, while opening a new research dimension for including contrastive examples as a complement with RAG. We release our code publicly.

We study the problem of active learning with the added twist that the learner is assisted by a helpful teacher. We consider the following natural interaction protocol: At each round, the learner proposes a query asking for the label of an instance x q, the teacher provides the requested label \{x q, y q\} along with explanatory information to guide the learning process. In this paper, we view this information in the form of an additional contrastive example ( \{x c, y c\}) where x c is picked from a set constrained by x q (e.g., dissimilar instances with the same label). Our focus is to design a teaching algorithm that can provide an informative sequence of contrastive examples to the learner to speed up the learning process. We show that this leads to a challenging sequence optimization problem where the algorithm's choices at a given round depend on the history of interactions.

Hate speech detection models are only as good as the data they are trained on. Datasets sourced from social media suffer from systematic gaps and biases, leading to unreliable models with simplistic decision boundaries. Adversarial datasets, collected by exploiting model weaknesses, promise to fix this problem. However, adversarial data collection can be slow and costly, and individual annotators have limited creativity. In this paper, we introduce GAHD, a new German Adversarial Hate speech Dataset comprising ca.\ 11k examples. During data collection, we explore new strategies for supporting annotators, to create more diverse adversarial examples more efficiently and provide a manual analysis of annotator disagreements for each strategy. Our experiments show that the resulting dataset is challenging even for state-of-the-art hate speech detection models, and that training on GAHD clearly improves model robustness. Further, we find that mixing multiple support strategies is most advantageous. We make GAHD publicly available at https://github.com/jagol/gahd.

Large language models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly important for machine learning applications. However, it can be challenging to align LLMs with our intent, particularly when we want to generate content that is preferable over others or when we want the LLM to respond in a certain style or tone that is hard to describe. To address this challenge, we propose an approach that uses contrastive examples to better describe our intent. This involves providing positive examples that illustrate the true intent, along with negative examples that show what characteristics we want LLMs to avoid. The negative examples can be retrieved from labeled data, written by a human, or generated by the LLM itself. Before generating an answer, we ask the model to analyze the examples to teach itself what to avoid. This reasoning step provides the model with the appropriate articulation of the user's need and guides it towards generting a better answer.