Large language models (LLMs) have made tremendous progress in natural language understanding and they have also been successfully adopted in other domains such as computer vision, robotics, reinforcement learning, etc. In this work, we apply LLMs to image generation tasks by directly generating the virtual brush strokes to paint an image. We present Painter, an LLM that can convert user prompts in text description format to sketches by generating the corresponding brush strokes in an auto-regressive way. We construct Painter based on off-the-shelf LLM that is pre-trained on a large text corpus, by fine-tuning it on the new task while preserving language understanding capabilities. We create a dataset of diverse multi-object sketches paired with textual prompts that covers several object types and tasks. Painter can generate sketches from text descriptions, remove objects from canvas, and detect and classify objects in sketches. Although this is an unprecedented pioneering work in using LLMs for auto-regressive image generation, the results are very encouraging.
相關內容
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in performing a range of instruction following tasks in few and zero-shot settings. However, teaching LLMs to perform tasks on the web presents fundamental challenges -- combinatorially large open-world tasks and variations across web interfaces. We tackle these challenges by leveraging LLMs to decompose web tasks into a collection of sub-tasks, each of which can be solved by a low-level, closed-loop policy. These policies constitute a shared grammar across tasks, i.e., new web tasks can be expressed as a composition of these policies. We propose a novel framework, Hierarchical Policies for Web Actions using LLMs (HeaP), that learns a set of hierarchical LLM prompts from demonstrations for planning high-level tasks and executing them via a sequence of low-level policies. We evaluate HeaP against a range of baselines on a suite of web tasks, including MiniWoB++, WebArena, a mock airline CRM, as well as live website interactions, and show that it is able to outperform prior works using orders of magnitude less data.
Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized the field of artificial intelligence, endowing it with sophisticated language understanding and generation capabilities. However, when faced with more complex and interconnected tasks that demand a profound and iterative thought process, LLMs reveal their inherent limitations. Autonomous LLM-powered multi-agent systems represent a strategic response to these challenges. Such systems strive for autonomously tackling user-prompted goals by decomposing them into manageable tasks and orchestrating their execution and result synthesis through a collective of specialized intelligent agents. Equipped with LLM-powered reasoning capabilities, these agents harness the cognitive synergy of collaborating with their peers, enhanced by leveraging contextual resources such as tools and datasets. While these architectures hold promising potential in amplifying AI capabilities, striking the right balance between different levels of autonomy and alignment remains the crucial challenge for their effective operation. This paper proposes a comprehensive multi-dimensional taxonomy, engineered to analyze how autonomous LLM-powered multi-agent systems balance the dynamic interplay between autonomy and alignment across various aspects inherent to architectural viewpoints such as goal-driven task management, agent composition, multi-agent collaboration, and context interaction. It also includes a domain-ontology model specifying fundamental architectural concepts. Our taxonomy aims to empower researchers, engineers, and AI practitioners to systematically analyze the architectural dynamics and balancing strategies employed by these increasingly prevalent AI systems. The exploratory taxonomic classification of selected representative LLM-powered multi-agent systems illustrates its practical utility and reveals potential for future research and development.
The recent progress in large language models (LLMs), especially the invention of chain-of-thought prompting, has made it possible to automatically answer questions by stepwise reasoning. However, when faced with more complicated problems that require non-linear thinking, even the strongest LLMs make mistakes. To address this, we explore whether LLMs are able to recognize errors in their own step-by-step reasoning, without resorting to external resources. To this end, we propose SelfCheck, a general-purpose zero-shot verification schema for recognizing such errors. We then use the results of these checks to improve question-answering performance by conducting weighted voting on multiple solutions to the question. We test SelfCheck on three datasets (GSM8K, MathQA, and MATH) and find that it successfully recognizes errors and, in turn, increases final answer accuracies.
Recent developments in large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in enhancing the capabilities of natural language processing (NLP). Despite these successes, there remains a dearth of research dedicated to the NLP problem-solving abilities of LLMs. To fill the gap in this area, we present a unique benchmarking dataset, NLPBench, comprising 378 college-level NLP questions spanning various NLP topics sourced from Yale University's prior final exams. NLPBench includes questions with context, in which multiple sub-questions share the same public information, and diverse question types, including multiple choice, short answer, and math. Our evaluation, centered on LLMs such as GPT-3.5/4, PaLM-2, and LLAMA-2, incorporates advanced prompting strategies like the chain-of-thought (CoT) and tree-of-thought (ToT). Our study reveals that the effectiveness of the advanced prompting strategies can be inconsistent, occasionally damaging LLM performance, especially in smaller models like the LLAMA-2 (13b). Furthermore, our manual assessment illuminated specific shortcomings in LLMs' scientific problem-solving skills, with weaknesses in logical decomposition and reasoning notably affecting results.
Large language models (LLMs) have garnered significant attention due to their impressive natural language processing (NLP) capabilities. Recently, many studies have focused on the tool utilization ability of LLMs. They primarily investigated how LLMs effectively collaborate with given specific tools. However, in scenarios where LLMs serve as intelligent agents, as seen in applications like AutoGPT and MetaGPT, LLMs are expected to engage in intricate decision-making processes that involve deciding whether to employ a tool and selecting the most suitable tool(s) from a collection of available tools to fulfill user requests. Therefore, in this paper, we introduce MetaTool, a benchmark designed to evaluate whether LLMs have tool usage awareness and can correctly choose tools. Specifically, we create a dataset called ToolE within the benchmark. This dataset contains various types of user queries in the form of prompts that trigger LLMs to use tools, including both single-tool and multi-tool scenarios. Subsequently, we set the tasks for both tool usage awareness and tool selection. We define four subtasks from different perspectives in tool selection, including tool selection with similar choices, tool selection in specific scenarios, tool selection with possible reliability issues, and multi-tool selection. We conduct experiments involving nine popular LLMs and find that the majority of them still struggle to effectively select tools, highlighting the existing gaps between LLMs and genuine intelligent agents. However, through the error analysis, we found there is still significant room for improvement. Finally, we conclude with insights for tool developers that follow ChatGPT to provide detailed descriptions that can enhance the tool selection performance of LLMs.
Large language models (LLMs) have recently experienced tremendous popularity and are widely used from casual conversations to AI-driven programming. However, despite their considerable success, LLMs are not entirely reliable and can give detailed guidance on how to conduct harmful or illegal activities. While safety measures can reduce the risk of such outputs, adversarial jailbreak attacks can still exploit LLMs to produce harmful content. These jailbreak templates are typically manually crafted, making large-scale testing challenging. In this paper, we introduce GPTFuzz, a novel black-box jailbreak fuzzing framework inspired by the AFL fuzzing framework. Instead of manual engineering, GPTFuzz automates the generation of jailbreak templates for red-teaming LLMs. At its core, GPTFuzz starts with human-written templates as initial seeds, then mutates them to produce new templates. We detail three key components of GPTFuzz: a seed selection strategy for balancing efficiency and variability, mutate operators for creating semantically equivalent or similar sentences, and a judgment model to assess the success of a jailbreak attack. We evaluate GPTFuzz against various commercial and open-source LLMs, including ChatGPT, LLaMa-2, and Vicuna, under diverse attack scenarios. Our results indicate that GPTFuzz consistently produces jailbreak templates with a high success rate, surpassing human-crafted templates. Remarkably, GPTFuzz achieves over 90% attack success rates against ChatGPT and Llama-2 models, even with suboptimal initial seed templates. We anticipate that GPTFuzz will be instrumental for researchers and practitioners in examining LLM robustness and will encourage further exploration into enhancing LLM safety.
The recent advancement of large language models (LLMs) has been achieved through a combo of instruction tuning and human alignment. However, building manually crafted instruction datasets and performing human alignment become the bottleneck for scaling the development of LLMs. In this paper, we exploit the idea of leveraging AI models in lieu of humans as the teacher to train student LLMs. Our method is inspired by how human students refine their writing skills by following the rubrics and learning from the revisions offered by their tutors. Specifically, we employ a teacher LLM to create a curriculum for instruction tuning of the student LLM, namely Curriculum Instruction TunING (CITING). It encompasses two main steps: (1) the teacher LLM crafts the rubrics for evaluating the answers corresponding to various types of questions, and (2) the student LLM learns to follow the rubrics and perform self-correction from the revision made by the teacher. We further iteratively carry out it to embody the procedure of CITING. We compare CITING to a series of state-of-the-art baselines on four datasets. Our method demonstrates strong improvement in terms of articulate, in-depth, and comprehensive by GPT-4 evaluation. Specifically, it achieves an average winning rate of 79.4% over SFT, 73.4% over RLHF, 78.1% over RRHF, and 76.3% over RAFT, respectively.
Large language models (LLMs), known for their capability in understanding and following instructions, are vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Researchers have found that current commercial LLMs either fail to be "harmless" by presenting unethical answers, or fail to be "helpful" by refusing to offer meaningful answers when faced with adversarial queries. To strike a balance between being helpful and harmless, we design a moving target defense (MTD) enhanced LLM system. The system aims to deliver non-toxic answers that align with outputs from multiple model candidates, making them more robust against adversarial attacks. We design a query and output analysis model to filter out unsafe or non-responsive answers. %to achieve the two objectives of randomly selecting outputs from different LLMs. We evaluate over 8 most recent chatbot models with state-of-the-art adversarial queries. Our MTD-enhanced LLM system reduces the attack success rate from 37.5\% to 0\%. Meanwhile, it decreases the response refusal rate from 50\% to 0\%.
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in natural language processing. However, their internal mechanisms are still unclear and this lack of transparency poses unwanted risks for downstream applications. Therefore, understanding and explaining these models is crucial for elucidating their behaviors, limitations, and social impacts. In this paper, we introduce a taxonomy of explainability techniques and provide a structured overview of methods for explaining Transformer-based language models. We categorize techniques based on the training paradigms of LLMs: traditional fine-tuning-based paradigm and prompting-based paradigm. For each paradigm, we summarize the goals and dominant approaches for generating local explanations of individual predictions and global explanations of overall model knowledge. We also discuss metrics for evaluating generated explanations, and discuss how explanations can be leveraged to debug models and improve performance. Lastly, we examine key challenges and emerging opportunities for explanation techniques in the era of LLMs in comparison to conventional machine learning models.
The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has substantially influenced natural language processing, demonstrating exceptional results across various tasks. In this study, we employ ``Introspective Tips" to facilitate LLMs in self-optimizing their decision-making. By introspectively examining trajectories, LLM refines its policy by generating succinct and valuable tips. Our method enhances the agent's performance in both few-shot and zero-shot learning situations by considering three essential scenarios: learning from the agent's past experiences, integrating expert demonstrations, and generalizing across diverse games. Importantly, we accomplish these improvements without fine-tuning the LLM parameters; rather, we adjust the prompt to generalize insights from the three aforementioned situations. Our framework not only supports but also emphasizes the advantage of employing LLM in in-contxt decision-making. Experiments involving over 100 games in TextWorld illustrate the superior performance of our approach.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191