Can machines think? This is a central question in artificial intelligence research. However, there is a substantial divergence of views on the answer to this question. Why do people have such significant differences of opinion, even when they are observing the same real world performance of artificial intelligence? The ability of logical reasoning like humans is often used as a criterion to assess whether a machine can think. This study explores whether human biases influence evaluations of the reasoning abilities of AI. An experiment was conducted where participants assessed two texts on the same topic, one AI generated and one human written,to test for perceptual biases in evaluating logical reasoning. Based on the experimental findings, a questionnaire was designed to quantify the attitudes toward AI.The results reveal a bias in perception. The evaluations of the logical reasoning ability of AI generated texts are significantly influenced by the preconceived views on the logical reasoning abilities of AI. Furthermore, frequent AI users were less likely to believe that AI usage undermines independent thinking.This study highlights the need to address perceptual biases to improve public understanding of AI's capabilities and foster better human AI interactions.

This paper introduces text-2-SQL-4-PM, a bilingual (Portuguese-English) benchmark dataset designed for the text-to-SQL task in the process mining domain. Text-to-SQL conversion facilitates natural language querying of databases, increasing accessibility for users without SQL expertise and productivity for those that are experts. The text-2-SQL-4-PM dataset is customized to address the unique challenges of process mining, including specialized vocabularies and single-table relational structures derived from event logs. The dataset comprises 1,655 natural language utterances, including human-generated paraphrases, 205 SQL statements, and ten qualifiers. Methods include manual curation by experts, professional translations, and a detailed annotation process to enable nuanced analyses of task complexity. Additionally, a baseline study using GPT-3.5 Turbo demonstrates the feasibility and utility of the dataset for text-to-SQL applications. The results show that text-2-SQL-4-PM supports evaluation of text-to-SQL implementations, offering broader applicability for semantic parsing and other natural language processing tasks.

Alignment methodologies have emerged as a critical pathway for enhancing language model alignment capabilities. While SFT (supervised fine-tuning) accelerates convergence through direct token-level loss intervention, its efficacy is constrained by offline policy trajectory. In contrast, RL(reinforcement learning) facilitates exploratory policy optimization, but suffers from low sample efficiency and stringent dependency on high-quality base models. To address these dual challenges, we propose GRAO (Group Relative Alignment Optimization), a unified framework that synergizes the respective strengths of SFT and RL through three key innovations: 1) A multi-sample generation strategy enabling comparative quality assessment via reward feedback; 2) A novel Group Direct Alignment Loss formulation leveraging intra-group relative advantage weighting; 3) Reference-aware parameter updates guided by pairwise preference dynamics. Our theoretical analysis establishes GRAO's convergence guarantees and sample efficiency advantages over conventional approaches. Comprehensive evaluations across complex human alignment tasks demonstrate GRAO's superior performance, achieving 57.70\%,17.65\% 7.95\% and 5.18\% relative improvements over SFT, DPO, PPO and GRPO baselines respectively. This work provides both a theoretically grounded alignment framework and empirical evidence for efficient capability evolution in language models.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in a wide range of NLP tasks. However, when it comes to authorship verification (AV) tasks, which involve determining whether two given texts share the same authorship, even advanced models like ChatGPT exhibit notable limitations. This paper introduces a novel approach, termed InstructAV, for authorship verification. This approach utilizes LLMs in conjunction with a parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) method to simultaneously improve accuracy and explainability. The distinctiveness of InstructAV lies in its ability to align classification decisions with transparent and understandable explanations, representing a significant progression in the field of authorship verification. Through comprehensive experiments conducted across various datasets, InstructAV demonstrates its state-of-the-art performance on the AV task, offering high classification accuracy coupled with enhanced explanation reliability.

Authorship Verification (AV) (do two documents have the same author?) is essential for many sensitive real-life applications. AV is often used in proprietary domains that require a private, offline model, making SOTA online models like ChatGPT undesirable. Other SOTA systems use methods, e.g. Siamese Networks, that are uninterpretable, and hence cannot be trusted in high-stakes applications. In this work, we take the first step to address the above challenges with our model CAVE (Controllable Authorship Verification Explanations): CAVE generates free-text AV explanations that are controlled to be 1) structured (can be decomposed into sub-explanations with respect to relevant linguistic features), and 2) easily verified for explanation-label consistency (via intermediate labels in sub-explanations). In this work, we train a Llama-3-8B as CAVE; since there are no human-written corpora for AV explanations, we sample silver-standard explanations from GPT-4-TURBO and distill them into a pretrained Llama-3-8B. Results on three difficult AV datasets IMdB2, Blog-Auth, and FanFiction show that CAVE generates high quality explanations (as measured by automatic and human evaluation) as well as competitive task accuracies.

Authorship verification (AV) is a fundamental task in natural language processing (NLP) and computational linguistics, with applications in forensic analysis, plagiarism detection, and identification of deceptive content. Existing AV techniques, including traditional stylometric and deep learning approaches, face limitations in terms of data requirements and lack of explainability. To address these limitations, this paper proposes PromptAV, a novel technique that leverages Large-Language Models (LLMs) for AV by providing step-by-step stylometric explanation prompts. PromptAV outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, operates effectively with limited training data, and enhances interpretability through intuitive explanations, showcasing its potential as an effective and interpretable solution for the AV task.

LLMs like GPT are great at tasks involving English which dominates in their training data. In this paper, we look at how they cope with tasks involving languages that are severely under-represented in their training data, in the context of data-to-text generation for Irish, Maltese, Welsh and Breton. During the prompt-engineering phase we tested a range of prompt types and formats on GPT-3.5 and~4 with a small sample of example input/output pairs. We then fully evaluated the two most promising prompts in two scenarios: (i) direct generation into the under-resourced language, and (ii) generation into English followed by translation into the under-resourced language. We find that few-shot prompting works better for direct generation into under-resourced languages, but that the difference disappears when pivoting via English. The few-shot + translation system variants were submitted to the WebNLG 2023 shared task where they outperformed competitor systems by substantial margins in all languages on all metrics. We conclude that good performance on under-resourced languages can be achieved out-of-the box with state-of-the-art LLMs. However, our best results (for Welsh) remain well below the lowest ranked English system at WebNLG'20.

We propose the novel adaptation of a pre-trained seq2seq model for readability assessment. We prove that a seq2seq model - T5 or BART - can be adapted to discern which text is more difficult from two given texts (pairwise). As an exploratory study to prompt-learn a neural network for text readability in a text-to-text manner, we report useful tips for future work in seq2seq training and ranking-based approach to readability assessment. Specifically, we test nine input-output formats/prefixes and show that they can significantly influence the final model performance. Also, we argue that the combination of text-to-text training and pairwise ranking setup 1) enables leveraging multiple parallel text simplification data for teaching readability and 2) trains a neural model for the general concept of readability (therefore, better cross-domain generalization). At last, we report a 99.6% pairwise classification accuracy on Newsela and a 98.7% for OneStopEnglish, through a joint training approach.

Given an input sequence (or prefix), modern language models often assign high probabilities to output sequences that are repetitive, incoherent, or irrelevant to the prefix; as such, model-generated text also contains such artifacts. To address these issues we present RankGen, a 1.2B parameter encoder model for English that scores model generations given a prefix. RankGen can be flexibly incorporated as a scoring function in beam search and used to decode from any pretrained language model. We train RankGen using large-scale contrastive learning to map a prefix close to the ground-truth sequence that follows it and far away from two types of negatives: (1) random sequences from the same document as the prefix, and (2) sequences generated from a large language model conditioned on the prefix. Experiments across four different language models (345M-11B parameters) and two domains show that RankGen significantly outperforms decoding algorithms like nucleus, top-k, and typical sampling, as well as contrastive decoding and search, on both automatic metrics (85.0 vs 77.3 MAUVE over nucleus) as well as human evaluations with English writers (74.5% human preference over nucleus sampling). Analysis reveals that RankGen outputs are more relevant to the prefix and improve continuity and coherence compared to baselines. We release our model checkpoints, code, and human preference data with explanations to facilitate future research.