Judging the equivalence between two SQL queries is a fundamental problem with many practical applications in data management and SQL generation (i.e., evaluating the quality of generated SQL queries in text-to-SQL task). While the research community has reasoned about SQL equivalence for decades, it poses considerable difficulties and no complete solutions exist. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong reasoning capability in conversation, question answering and solving mathematics challenges. In this paper, we study if LLMs can be used to determine the equivalence between SQL queries under two notions of SQL equivalence (semantic equivalence and relaxed equivalence). To assist LLMs in generating high quality responses, we present two prompting techniques: Miniature & Mull and Explain & Compare. The former technique is used to evaluate the semantic equivalence in which it asks LLMs to execute a query on a simple database instance and then explore if a counterexample exists by modifying the database. The latter technique is used to evaluate the relaxed equivalence in which it asks LLMs to explain the queries and then compare if they contain significant logical differences. Our experiments demonstrate using our techniques, LLMs is a promising tool to help data engineers in writing semantically equivalent SQL queries, however challenges still persist, and is a better metric for evaluating SQL generation than the popular execution accuracy.
相關內容
As artificial intelligence systems grow more powerful, there has been increasing interest in "AI safety" research to address emerging and future risks. However, the field of AI safety remains poorly defined and inconsistently measured, leading to confusion about how researchers can contribute. This lack of clarity is compounded by the unclear relationship between AI safety benchmarks and upstream general capabilities (e.g., general knowledge and reasoning). To address these issues, we conduct a comprehensive meta-analysis of AI safety benchmarks, empirically analyzing their correlation with general capabilities across dozens of models and providing a survey of existing directions in AI safety. Our findings reveal that many safety benchmarks highly correlate with upstream model capabilities, potentially enabling "safetywashing" -- where capability improvements are misrepresented as safety advancements. Based on these findings, we propose an empirical foundation for developing more meaningful safety metrics and define AI safety in a machine learning research context as a set of clearly delineated research goals that are empirically separable from generic capabilities advancements. In doing so, we aim to provide a more rigorous framework for AI safety research, advancing the science of safety evaluations and clarifying the path towards measurable progress.
Regular model checking is a well-established technique for the verification of infinite-state systems whose configurations can be represented as finite words over a suitable alphabet. It applies to systems whose set of initial configurations is regular, and whose transition relation is captured by a length-preserving transducer. To verify safety properties, regular model checking iteratively computes automata recognizing increasingly larger regular sets of reachable configurations, and checks if they contain unsafe configurations. Since this procedure often does not terminate, acceleration, abstraction, and widening techniques have been developed to compute a regular superset of the set of reachable configurations. In this paper we develop a complementary approach. Instead of approaching the set of reachable configurations from below, we start with the set of all configurations and compute increasingly smaller regular supersets of it. We use that the set of reachable configurations is equal to the intersection of all inductive invariants of the system. Since the intersection is in general non-regular, we introduce $b$-bounded invariants, defined as those representable by CNF-formulas with at most $b$ clauses. We prove that, for every $b \geq 0$, the intersection of all $b$-bounded inductive invariants is regular, and show how to construct an automaton recognizing it. We study the complexity of deciding if this automaton accepts some unsafe configuration. We show that the problem is in \textsc{EXPSPACE} for every $b \geq 0$, and \textsc{PSPACE}-complete for $b=1$. Finally, we study how large must $b$ be to prove safety properties of a number of benchmarks.
Low-Rank Adaptation, also known as LoRA, has emerged as a prominent method for parameter-efficient fine-tuning foundation models by re-parameterizing the original matrix into the product of two low-rank matrices. Despite its efficiency, LoRA often yields inferior performance compared to full fine-tuning. In this paper, we propose LoRA-Pro to bridge this performance gap. Firstly, we delve into the optimization processes in LoRA and full fine-tuning. We reveal that while LoRA employs low-rank approximation, it neglects to approximate the optimization process of full fine-tuning. To address this, we introduce a novel concept called the "equivalent gradient." This virtual gradient makes the optimization process on the re-parameterized matrix equivalent to LoRA, which can be used to quantify the differences between LoRA and full fine-tuning. The equivalent gradient is derived from the gradients of matrices $A$ and $B$. To narrow the performance gap, our approach minimizes the differences between the equivalent gradient and the gradient obtained from full fine-tuning during the optimization process. By solving this objective, we derive optimal closed-form solutions for updating matrices $A$ and $B$. Our method constrains the optimization process, shrinking the performance gap between LoRA and full fine-tuning. Extensive experiments on natural language processing tasks validate the effectiveness of our method.
One of the major aspects contributing to the striking performance of large language models (LLMs) is the vast amount of factual knowledge accumulated during pre-training. Yet, many LLMs suffer from self-inconsistency, which raises doubts about their trustworthiness and reliability. In this paper, we focus on entity type ambiguity and analyze current state-of-the-art LLMs for their proficiency and consistency in applying their factual knowledge when prompted for entities under ambiguity. To do so, we propose an evaluation protocol that disentangles knowing from applying knowledge, and test state-of-the-art LLMs on 49 entities. Our experiments reveal that LLMs perform poorly with ambiguous prompts, achieving only 80% accuracy. Our results further demonstrate systematic discrepancies in LLM behavior and their failure to consistently apply information, indicating that the models can exhibit knowledge without being able to utilize it, significant biases for preferred readings, as well as self inconsistencies. Our study highlights the importance of handling entity ambiguity in future for more trustworthy LLMs
GPT-4V has attracted considerable attention due to its extraordinary capacity for integrating and processing multimodal information. At the same time, its ability of face recognition raises new safety concerns of privacy leakage. Despite researchers' efforts in safety alignment through RLHF or preprocessing filters, vulnerabilities might still be exploited. In our study, we introduce AutoJailbreak, an innovative automatic jailbreak technique inspired by prompt optimization. We leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) for red-teaming to refine the jailbreak prompt and employ weak-to-strong in-context learning prompts to boost efficiency. Furthermore, we present an effective search method that incorporates early stopping to minimize optimization time and token expenditure. Our experiments demonstrate that AutoJailbreak significantly surpasses conventional methods, achieving an Attack Success Rate (ASR) exceeding 95.3\%. This research sheds light on strengthening GPT-4V security, underscoring the potential for LLMs to be exploited in compromising GPT-4V integrity.
Language agents, built on top of language models (LMs), are systems that can interact with complex environments, such as the open web. In this work, we examine whether such agents can perform realistic and time-consuming tasks on the web, e.g., monitoring real-estate markets or locating relevant nearby businesses. We introduce AssistantBench, a challenging new benchmark consisting of 214 realistic tasks that can be automatically evaluated, covering different scenarios and domains. We find that AssistantBench exposes the limitations of current systems, including language models and retrieval-augmented language models, as no model reaches an accuracy of more than 25 points. While closed-book LMs perform well, they exhibit low precision since they tend to hallucinate facts. State-of-the-art web agents reach a score of near zero. Additionally, we introduce SeePlanAct (SPA), a new web agent that significantly outperforms previous agents, and an ensemble of SPA and closed-book models reaches the best overall performance. Moreover, we analyze failures of current systems and highlight that web navigation remains a major challenge.
The dynamics of probability density functions has been extensively studied in science and engineering to understand physical phenomena and facilitate algorithmic design. Of particular interest are dynamics that can be formulated as gradient flows of energy functionals under the Wasserstein metric. The development of functional inequalities, such as the log-Sobolev inequality, plays a pivotal role in analyzing the convergence of these dynamics. The goal of this paper is to parallel the success of techniques using functional inequalities, for dynamics that are gradient flows under the Fisher-Rao metric, with various $f$-divergences as energy functionals. Such dynamics take the form of a nonlocal differential equation, for which existing analysis critically relies on using the explicit solution formula in special cases. We provide a comprehensive study on functional inequalities and the relevant geodesic convexity for Fisher-Rao gradient flows under minimal assumptions. A notable feature of the obtained functional inequalities is that they do not depend on the log-concavity or log-Sobolev constants of the target distribution. Consequently, the convergence rate of the dynamics (assuming well-posed) is uniform across general target distributions, making them potentially desirable dynamics for posterior sampling applications in Bayesian inference.
Property-based testing (PBT), while an established technique in the software testing research community, is still relatively underused in real-world software. Pain points in writing property-based tests include implementing diverse random input generators and thinking of meaningful properties to test. Developers, however, are more amenable to writing documentation; plenty of library API documentation is available and can be used as natural language specifications for PBTs. As large language models (LLMs) have recently shown promise in a variety of coding tasks, we investigate using modern LLMs to automatically synthesize PBTs using two prompting techniques. A key challenge is to rigorously evaluate the LLM-synthesized PBTs. We propose a methodology to do so considering several properties of the generated tests: (1) validity, (2) soundness, and (3) property coverage, a novel metric that measures the ability of the PBT to detect property violations through generation of property mutants. In our evaluation on 40 Python library API methods across three models (GPT-4, Gemini-1.5-Pro, Claude-3-Opus), we find that with the best model and prompting approach, a valid and sound PBT can be synthesized in 2.4 samples on average. We additionally find that our metric for determining soundness of a PBT is aligned with human judgment of property assertions, achieving a precision of 100% and recall of 97%. Finally, we evaluate the property coverage of LLMs across all API methods and find that the best model (GPT-4) is able to automatically synthesize correct PBTs for 21% of properties extractable from API documentation.
The integration of new modalities into frontier AI systems offers exciting capabilities, but also increases the possibility such systems can be adversarially manipulated in undesirable ways. In this work, we focus on a popular class of vision-language models (VLMs) that generate text outputs conditioned on visual and textual inputs. We conducted a large-scale empirical study to assess the transferability of gradient-based universal image "jailbreaks" using a diverse set of over 40 open-parameter VLMs, including 18 new VLMs that we publicly release. Overall, we find that transferable gradient-based image jailbreaks are extremely difficult to obtain. When an image jailbreak is optimized against a single VLM or against an ensemble of VLMs, the jailbreak successfully jailbreaks the attacked VLM(s), but exhibits little-to-no transfer to any other VLMs; transfer is not affected by whether the attacked and target VLMs possess matching vision backbones or language models, whether the language model underwent instruction-following and/or safety-alignment training, or many other factors. Only two settings display partially successful transfer: between identically-pretrained and identically-initialized VLMs with slightly different VLM training data, and between different training checkpoints of a single VLM. Leveraging these results, we then demonstrate that transfer can be significantly improved against a specific target VLM by attacking larger ensembles of "highly-similar" VLMs. These results stand in stark contrast to existing evidence of universal and transferable text jailbreaks against language models and transferable adversarial attacks against image classifiers, suggesting that VLMs may be more robust to gradient-based transfer attacks.
Although large language models (LLMs) have been largely successful in generating functionally correct programs, conditioning models to produce efficient solutions while ensuring correctness remains a challenge. Further, unreliability in benchmarking code efficiency is a hurdle across varying hardware specifications for popular interpreted languages such as Python. In this paper, we present ECCO, a reproducible benchmark for evaluating program efficiency via two paradigms: natural language (NL) based code generation and history-based code editing. On ECCO, we adapt and thoroughly investigate the three most promising existing LLM-based approaches: in-context learning, iterative refinement with execution or NL feedback, and fine-tuning conditioned on execution and editing history. While most methods degrade functional correctness and moderately increase program efficiency, we find that adding execution information often helps maintain functional correctness, and NL feedback enhances more on efficiency. We release our benchmark to support future work on LLM-based generation of efficient code.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191