亚洲男人的天堂2018av,欧美草比,久久久久久免费视频精选,国色天香在线看免费,久久久久亚洲av成人片仓井空

With the rapid advance of machine learning (ML) technology, large language models (LLMs) are increasingly explored as an intelligent tool to generate program code from natural language specifications. However, existing evaluations of LLMs have focused on their capabilities in comparison with humans. It is desirable to evaluate their usability when deciding on whether to use a LLM in software production. This paper proposes a user centric method for this purpose. It includes metadata in the test cases of a benchmark to describe their usages, conducts testing in a multi-attempt process that mimics the uses of LLMs, measures LLM generated solutions on a set of quality attributes that reflect usability, and evaluates the performance based on user experiences in the uses of LLMs as a tool. The paper also reports a case study with the method in the evaluation of ChatGPT's usability as a code generation tool for the R programming language. Our experiments demonstrated that ChatGPT is highly useful for generating R program code although it may fail on hard programming tasks. The user experiences are good with overall average number of attempts being 1.61 and the average time of completion being 47.02 seconds. Our experiments also found that the weakest aspect of usability is conciseness, which has a score of 3.80 out of 5.

Cooperative Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) algorithms, trained only to optimize task reward, can lead to a concentration of power where the failure or adversarial intent of a single agent could decimate the reward of every agent in the system. In the context of teams of people, it is often useful to explicitly consider how power is distributed to ensure no person becomes a single point of failure. Here, we argue that explicitly regularizing the concentration of power in cooperative RL systems can result in systems which are more robust to single agent failure, adversarial attacks, and incentive changes of co-players. To this end, we define a practical pairwise measure of power that captures the ability of any co-player to influence the ego agent's reward, and then propose a power-regularized objective which balances task reward and power concentration. Given this new objective, we show that there always exists an equilibrium where every agent is playing a power-regularized best-response balancing power and task reward. Moreover, we present two algorithms for training agents towards this power-regularized objective: Sample Based Power Regularization (SBPR), which injects adversarial data during training; and Power Regularization via Intrinsic Motivation (PRIM), which adds an intrinsic motivation to regulate power to the training objective. Our experiments demonstrate that both algorithms successfully balance task reward and power, leading to lower power behavior than the baseline of task-only reward and avoid catastrophic events in case an agent in the system goes off-policy.

Evaluating classifications is crucial in statistics and machine learning, as it influences decision-making across various fields, such as patient prognosis and therapy in critical conditions. The Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) is recognized as a performance metric with high reliability, offering a balanced measurement even in the presence of class imbalances. Despite its importance, there remains a notable lack of comprehensive research on the statistical inference of MCC. This deficiency often leads to studies merely validating and comparing MCC point estimates, a practice that, while common, overlooks the statistical significance and reliability of results. Addressing this research gap, our paper introduces and evaluates several methods to construct asymptotic confidence intervals for the single MCC and the differences between MCCs in paired designs. Through simulations across various scenarios, we evaluate the finite-sample behavior of these methods and compare their performances. Furthermore, through real data analysis, we illustrate the potential utility of our findings in comparing binary classifiers, highlighting the possible contributions of our research in this field.

Self-play via online learning is one of the premier ways to solve large-scale two-player zero-sum games, both in theory and practice. Particularly popular algorithms include optimistic multiplicative weights update (OMWU) and optimistic gradient-descent-ascent (OGDA). While both algorithms enjoy $O(1/T)$ ergodic convergence to Nash equilibrium in two-player zero-sum games, OMWU offers several advantages including logarithmic dependence on the size of the payoff matrix and $\widetilde{O}(1/T)$ convergence to coarse correlated equilibria even in general-sum games. However, in terms of last-iterate convergence in two-player zero-sum games, an increasingly popular topic in this area, OGDA guarantees that the duality gap shrinks at a rate of $O(1/\sqrt{T})$, while the best existing last-iterate convergence for OMWU depends on some game-dependent constant that could be arbitrarily large. This begs the question: is this potentially slow last-iterate convergence an inherent disadvantage of OMWU, or is the current analysis too loose? Somewhat surprisingly, we show that the former is true. More generally, we prove that a broad class of algorithms that do not forget the past quickly all suffer the same issue: for any arbitrarily small $\delta>0$, there exists a $2\times 2$ matrix game such that the algorithm admits a constant duality gap even after $1/\delta$ rounds. This class of algorithms includes OMWU and other standard optimistic follow-the-regularized-leader algorithms.

This work uniquely identifies and characterizes four prevalent multimodal model architectural patterns in the contemporary multimodal landscape. Systematically categorizing models by architecture type facilitates monitoring of developments in the multimodal domain. Distinct from recent survey papers that present general information on multimodal architectures, this research conducts a comprehensive exploration of architectural details and identifies four specific architectural types. The types are distinguished by their respective methodologies for integrating multimodal inputs into the deep neural network model. The first two types (Type A and B) deeply fuses multimodal inputs within the internal layers of the model, whereas the following two types (Type C and D) facilitate early fusion at the input stage. Type-A employs standard cross-attention, whereas Type-B utilizes custom-designed layers for modality fusion within the internal layers. On the other hand, Type-C utilizes modality-specific encoders, while Type-D leverages tokenizers to process the modalities at the model's input stage. The identified architecture types aid the monitoring of any-to-any multimodal model development. Notably, Type-C and Type-D are currently favored in the construction of any-to-any multimodal models. Type-C, distinguished by its non-tokenizing multimodal model architecture, is emerging as a viable alternative to Type-D, which utilizes input-tokenizing techniques. To assist in model selection, this work highlights the advantages and disadvantages of each architecture type based on data and compute requirements, architecture complexity, scalability, simplification of adding modalities, training objectives, and any-to-any multimodal generation capability.

Reasoning, a crucial ability for complex problem-solving, plays a pivotal role in various real-world settings such as negotiation, medical diagnosis, and criminal investigation. It serves as a fundamental methodology in the field of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). With the ongoing development of foundation models, e.g., Large Language Models (LLMs), there is a growing interest in exploring their abilities in reasoning tasks. In this paper, we introduce seminal foundation models proposed or adaptable for reasoning, highlighting the latest advancements in various reasoning tasks, methods, and benchmarks. We then delve into the potential future directions behind the emergence of reasoning abilities within foundation models. We also discuss the relevance of multimodal learning, autonomous agents, and super alignment in the context of reasoning. By discussing these future research directions, we hope to inspire researchers in their exploration of this field, stimulate further advancements in reasoning with foundation models, and contribute to the development of AGI.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown excellent generalization capabilities that have led to the development of numerous models. These models propose various new architectures, tweaking existing architectures with refined training strategies, increasing context length, using high-quality training data, and increasing training time to outperform baselines. Analyzing new developments is crucial for identifying changes that enhance training stability and improve generalization in LLMs. This survey paper comprehensively analyses the LLMs architectures and their categorization, training strategies, training datasets, and performance evaluations and discusses future research directions. Moreover, the paper also discusses the basic building blocks and concepts behind LLMs, followed by a complete overview of LLMs, including their important features and functions. Finally, the paper summarizes significant findings from LLM research and consolidates essential architectural and training strategies for developing advanced LLMs. Given the continuous advancements in LLMs, we intend to regularly update this paper by incorporating new sections and featuring the latest LLM models.

The concept of causality plays an important role in human cognition . In the past few decades, causal inference has been well developed in many fields, such as computer science, medicine, economics, and education. With the advancement of deep learning techniques, it has been increasingly used in causal inference against counterfactual data. Typically, deep causal models map the characteristics of covariates to a representation space and then design various objective optimization functions to estimate counterfactual data unbiasedly based on the different optimization methods. This paper focuses on the survey of the deep causal models, and its core contributions are as follows: 1) we provide relevant metrics under multiple treatments and continuous-dose treatment; 2) we incorporate a comprehensive overview of deep causal models from both temporal development and method classification perspectives; 3) we assist a detailed and comprehensive classification and analysis of relevant datasets and source code.

We describe the new field of mathematical analysis of deep learning. This field emerged around a list of research questions that were not answered within the classical framework of learning theory. These questions concern: the outstanding generalization power of overparametrized neural networks, the role of depth in deep architectures, the apparent absence of the curse of dimensionality, the surprisingly successful optimization performance despite the non-convexity of the problem, understanding what features are learned, why deep architectures perform exceptionally well in physical problems, and which fine aspects of an architecture affect the behavior of a learning task in which way. We present an overview of modern approaches that yield partial answers to these questions. For selected approaches, we describe the main ideas in more detail.

Promoting behavioural diversity is critical for solving games with non-transitive dynamics where strategic cycles exist, and there is no consistent winner (e.g., Rock-Paper-Scissors). Yet, there is a lack of rigorous treatment for defining diversity and constructing diversity-aware learning dynamics. In this work, we offer a geometric interpretation of behavioural diversity in games and introduce a novel diversity metric based on \emph{determinantal point processes} (DPP). By incorporating the diversity metric into best-response dynamics, we develop \emph{diverse fictitious play} and \emph{diverse policy-space response oracle} for solving normal-form games and open-ended games. We prove the uniqueness of the diverse best response and the convergence of our algorithms on two-player games. Importantly, we show that maximising the DPP-based diversity metric guarantees to enlarge the \emph{gamescape} -- convex polytopes spanned by agents' mixtures of strategies. To validate our diversity-aware solvers, we test on tens of games that show strong non-transitivity. Results suggest that our methods achieve much lower exploitability than state-of-the-art solvers by finding effective and diverse strategies.