Goto

Collaborating Authors

 question 2





Investigating the Impact of Rationales for LLMs on Natural Language Understanding

Shi, Wenhang, Bian, Shuqing, Chen, Yiren, Zhang, Xinyi, Zhao, Zhe, Hu, Pengfei, Lu, Wei, Du, Xiaoyong

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Chain-of-thought (CoT) rationales, which provide step-by-step reasoning to derive final answers, benefit LLMs in both inference and training. Incorporating rationales, either by generating them before answering during inference, or by placing them before or after the original answers during training - significantly improves model performance on mathematical, symbolic and commonsense reasoning tasks. However, most work focuses on the role of rationales in these reasoning tasks, overlooking their potential impact on other important tasks like natural language understanding (NLU) tasks. In this work, we raise the question: Can rationales similarly benefit NLU tasks? To conduct a systematic exploration, we construct NLURC, a comprehensive and high-quality NLU dataset collection with rationales, and develop various rationale-augmented methods. Through exploring the applicability of these methods on NLU tasks using the dataset, we uncover several potentially surprising findings: (1) CoT inference shifts from hindering NLU performance to surpassing direct label prediction as model size grows, indicating a positive correlation. (2) Most rationale-augmented training methods perform worse than label-only training, with one specially designed method consistently achieving improvements. (3) LLMs trained with rationales achieve significant performance gains on unseen NLU tasks, rivaling models ten times their size, while delivering interpretability on par with commercial LLMs.





939314105ce8701e67489642ef4d49e8-AuthorFeedback.pdf

Neural Information Processing Systems

We answer your main questions as follows. "Is there any hope to avoid the We will add a remark in the paper to discuss this point more thoroughly. Question 2. "Technically, I think in order for Lemma 4 to hold, f needs to be defined on the whole vector space" The issue has also been identified by Reviewer #3. We will improve the paper writing to make this point more clear. Question 2. "what regret ... if ... only access to 1 gradient query per step, rather than the two used in OEGD." We address your main questions as follows. Question 1. "how would the lower-bound of function appear in your bounds if we assume they are not positive" Question 2. "how would the algorithms / results change if 0 is not in X?" Answer 2. There are three places we use this assumption: About the self-bounding property of smooth functions, you are absolutely correct. For other minor issues, we will carefully revise the paper according to your constructive comments. Below we address your concerns and clarify the misunderstandings. Question 2. "The novelty of the paper is limited.


Extracting Abstraction Dimensions by Identifying Syntax Pattern from Texts

Zhou, Jian, Li, Jiazheng, Zhuge, Sirui, Zhuge, Hai

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

This paper proposed an approach to automatically discovering subject dimension, action dimension, object dimension and adverbial dimension from texts to efficiently operate texts and support query in natural language. The high quality of trees guarantees that all subjects, actions, objects and adverbials and their subclass relations within texts can be represented. The independency of trees ensures that there is no redundant representation between trees. The expressiveness of trees ensures that the majority of sentences can be accessed from each tree and the rest of sentences can be accessed from at least one tree so that the tree-based search mechanism can support querying in natural language. Experiments show that the average precision, recall and F1-score of the abstraction trees constructed by the subclass relations of subject, action, object and adverbial are all greater than 80%. The application of the proposed approach to supporting query in natural language demonstrates that different types of question patterns for querying subject or object have high coverage of texts, and searching multiple trees on subject, action, object and adverbial according to the question pattern can quickly reduce search space to locate target sentences, which can support precise operation on texts.


MMLU-CF: A Contamination-free Multi-task Language Understanding Benchmark

Zhao, Qihao, Huang, Yangyu, Lv, Tengchao, Cui, Lei, Sun, Qinzheng, Mao, Shaoguang, Zhang, Xin, Xin, Ying, Yin, Qiufeng, Li, Scarlett, Wei, Furu

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Multiple-choice question (MCQ) datasets like Massive Multitask Language Understanding (MMLU) are widely used to evaluate the commonsense, understanding, and problem-solving abilities of large language models (LLMs). However, the open-source nature of these benchmarks and the broad sources of training data for LLMs have inevitably led to benchmark contamination, resulting in unreliable evaluation results. To alleviate this issue, we propose a contamination-free and more challenging MCQ benchmark called MMLU-CF. This benchmark reassesses LLMs' understanding of world knowledge by averting both unintentional and malicious data leakage. To avoid unintentional data leakage, we source data from a broader domain and design three decontamination rules. To prevent malicious data leakage, we divide the benchmark into validation and test sets with similar difficulty and subject distributions. The test set remains closed-source to ensure reliable results, while the validation set is publicly available to promote transparency and facilitate independent verification. Our evaluation of mainstream LLMs reveals that the powerful GPT-4o achieves merely a 5-shot score of 73.4% and a 0-shot score of 71.9% on the test set, which indicates the effectiveness of our approach in creating a more rigorous and contamination-free evaluation standard. The GitHub repository is available at https://github.com/microsoft/MMLU-CF and the dataset refers to https://huggingface.co/datasets/microsoft/MMLU-CF.