Goto

Collaborating Authors

 llm era


Backtranslation and paraphrasing in the LLM era? Comparing data augmentation methods for emotion classification

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Numerous domain-specific machine learning tasks struggle with data scarcity and class imbalance. This paper systematically explores data augmentation methods for NLP, particularly through large language models like GPT. The purpose of this paper is to examine and evaluate whether traditional methods such as paraphrasing and backtranslation can leverage a new generation of models to achieve comparable performance to purely generative methods. Methods aimed at solving the problem of data scarcity and utilizing ChatGPT were chosen, as well as an exemplary dataset. We conducted a series of experiments comparing four different approaches to data augmentation in multiple experimental setups. We then evaluated the results both in terms of the quality of generated data and its impact on classification performance. The key findings indicate that backtranslation and paraphrasing can yield comparable or even better results than zero and a few-shot generation of examples.


Revisiting Word Embeddings in the LLM Era

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently shown remarkable advancement in various NLP tasks. As such, a popular trend has emerged lately where NLP researchers extract word/sentence/document embeddings from these large decoder-only models and use them for various inference tasks with promising results. However, it is still unclear whether the performance improvement of LLM-induced embeddings is merely because of scale or whether underlying embeddings they produce significantly differ from classical encoding models like Word2Vec, GloVe, Sentence-BERT (SBERT) or Universal Sentence Encoder (USE). This is the central question we investigate in the paper by systematically comparing classical decontextualized and contextualized word embeddings with the same for LLM-induced embeddings. Our results show that LLMs cluster semantically related words more tightly and perform better on analogy tasks in decontextualized settings. However, in contextualized settings, classical models like SimCSE often outperform LLMs in sentence-level similarity assessment tasks, highlighting their continued relevance for fine-grained semantics.


What is the Role of Small Models in the LLM Era: A Survey

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant progress in advancing artificial general intelligence (AGI), leading to the development of increasingly large models such as GPT-4 and LLaMA-405B. However, scaling up model sizes results in exponentially higher computational costs and energy consumption, making these models impractical for academic researchers and businesses with limited resources. At the same time, Small Models (SMs) are frequently used in practical settings, although their significance is currently underestimated. This raises important questions about the role of small models in the era of LLMs, a topic that has received limited attention in prior research. In this work, we systematically examine the relationship between LLMs and SMs from two key perspectives: Collaboration and Competition. We hope this survey provides valuable insights for practitioners, fostering a deeper understanding of the contribution of small models and promoting more efficient use of computational resources. The code is available at https://github.com/tigerchen52/role_of_small_models


LLMs may Dominate Information Access: Neural Retrievers are Biased Towards LLM-Generated Texts

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Recently, the emergence of large language models (LLMs) has revolutionized the paradigm of information retrieval (IR) applications, especially in web search. With their remarkable capabilities in generating human-like texts, LLMs have created enormous texts on the Internet. As a result, IR systems in the LLMs era are facing a new challenge: the indexed documents now are not only written by human beings but also automatically generated by the LLMs. How these LLM-generated documents influence the IR systems is a pressing and still unexplored question. In this work, we conduct a quantitative evaluation of different IR models in scenarios where both human-written and LLM-generated texts are involved. Surprisingly, our findings indicate that neural retrieval models tend to rank LLM-generated documents higher. We refer to this category of biases in neural retrieval models towards the LLM-generated text as the \textbf{source bias}. Moreover, we discover that this bias is not confined to the first-stage neural retrievers, but extends to the second-stage neural re-rankers. Then, we provide an in-depth analysis from the perspective of text compression and observe that neural models can better understand the semantic information of LLM-generated text, which is further substantiated by our theoretical analysis. To mitigate the source bias, we also propose a plug-and-play debiased constraint for the optimization objective, and experimental results show the effectiveness. Finally, we discuss the potential severe concerns stemming from the observed source bias and hope our findings can serve as a critical wake-up call to the IR community and beyond. To facilitate future explorations of IR in the LLM era, the constructed two new benchmarks and codes will later be available at \url{https://github.com/KID-22/LLM4IR-Bias}.