Aligning large language models (LLMs) with human intentions has become a critical task for safely deploying models in real-world systems. While existing alignment approaches have seen empirical success, theoretically understanding how these methods affect model behavior remains an open question. Our work provides an initial attempt to theoretically analyze the learning dynamics of human preference alignment. We formally show how the distribution of preference datasets influences the rate of model updates and provide rigorous guarantees on the training accuracy. Our theory also reveals an intricate phenomenon where the optimization is prone to prioritizing certain behaviors with higher preference distinguishability. We empirically validate our findings on contemporary LLMs and alignment tasks, reinforcing our theoretical insights and shedding light on considerations for future alignment approaches. Disclaimer: This paper contains potentially offensive text; reader discretion is advised.
Large language models (LLMs) often show unwarranted preference for certain choice options when responding to multiple-choice questions, posing significant reliability concerns in LLM-automated systems. To mitigate this selection bias problem, previous solutions utilized debiasing methods to adjust the model's input and/or output. Our work, in contrast, investigates the model's internal representation of the selection bias. Specifically, we introduce a novel debiasing approach, Bias Node Pruning (BNP), which eliminates the linear layer parameters that contribute to the bias. Furthermore, we present Auxiliary Option Injection (AOI), a simple yet effective input modification technique for debiasing, which is compatible even with black-box LLMs. To provide a more systematic evaluation of selection bias, we review existing metrics and introduce Choice Kullback-Leibler Divergence (CKLD), which addresses the insensitivity of the commonly used metrics to label imbalance. Experiments show that our methods are robust and adaptable across various datasets when applied to three LLMs.
Honesty is a fundamental principle for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values, requiring these models to recognize what they know and don't know and be able to faithfully express their knowledge. Despite promising, current LLMs still exhibit significant dishonest behaviors, such as confidently presenting wrong answers or failing to express what they know. In addition, research on the honesty of LLMs also faces challenges, including varying definitions of honesty, difficulties in distinguishing between known and unknown knowledge, and a lack of comprehensive understanding of related research. To address these issues, we provide a survey on the honesty of LLMs, covering its clarification, evaluation approaches, and strategies for improvement. Moreover, we offer insights for future research, aiming to inspire further exploration in this important area.
The ability to understand causality significantly impacts the competence of large language models (LLMs) in output explanation and counterfactual reasoning, as causality reveals the underlying data distribution. However, the lack of a comprehensive benchmark currently limits the evaluation of LLMs' causal learning capabilities. To fill this gap, this paper develops CausalBench based on data from the causal research community, enabling comparative evaluations of LLMs against traditional causal learning algorithms. To provide a comprehensive investigation, we offer three tasks of varying difficulties, including correlation, causal skeleton, and causality identification. Evaluations of 19 leading LLMs reveal that, while closed-source LLMs show potential for simple causal relationships, they significantly lag behind traditional algorithms on larger-scale networks ($>50$ nodes). Specifically, LLMs struggle with collider structures but excel at chain structures, especially at long-chain causality analogous to Chains-of-Thought techniques. This supports the current prompt approaches while suggesting directions to enhance LLMs' causal reasoning capability. Furthermore, CausalBench incorporates background knowledge and training data into prompts to thoroughly unlock LLMs' text-comprehension ability during evaluation, whose findings indicate that, LLM understand causality through semantic associations with distinct entities, rather than directly from contextual information or numerical distributions.
Recent large language models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive capabilities in handling long contexts, some exhibiting near-perfect recall on synthetic retrieval tasks. However, these evaluations have mainly focused on English text and involved a single target sentence within lengthy contexts. Our work investigates how LLM performance generalizes to multilingual settings with multiple hidden target sentences. We comprehensively evaluate several long-context LLMs on retrieval and reasoning tasks across five languages: English, Vietnamese, Indonesian, Swahili, and Somali. These languages share the Latin script but belong to distinct language families and resource levels. Our analysis reveals a significant performance gap between languages. The best-performing models such as Gemini-1.5 and GPT-4o, achieve around 96% accuracy in English to around 36% in Somali with a single target sentence. However, this accuracy drops to 40% in English and 0% in Somali when dealing with three target sentences. Our findings highlight the challenges long-context LLMs face when processing longer contexts, an increase in the number of target sentences, or languages of lower resource levels.
While large language models (LLMs) have made notable advancements in natural language processing, they continue to struggle with processing extensive text. Memory mechanism offers a flexible solution for managing long contexts, utilizing techniques such as compression, summarization, and structuring to facilitate nuanced and efficient handling of large volumes of text. However, existing techniques face challenges with static knowledge integration, leading to insufficient adaptation to task-specific needs and missing multi-segmentation relationships, which hinders the dynamic reorganization and logical combination of relevant segments during the response process. To address these issues, we introduce a novel strategy, Question then Reflection Memory Mechanism (QRMeM), incorporating a dual-structured memory pool. This pool synergizes static textual content with structured graph guidance, fostering a reflective trial-and-error approach for navigating and identifying relevant segments. Our evaluation across multiple-choice questions (MCQ) and multi-document question answering (Multi-doc QA) benchmarks showcases QRMeM enhanced performance compared to existing approaches.
In-context learning (ICL) refers to a remarkable capability of pretrained large language models, which can learn a new task given a few examples during inference. However, theoretical understanding of ICL is largely under-explored, particularly whether transformers can be trained to generalize to unseen examples in a prompt, which will require the model to acquire contextual knowledge of the prompt for generalization. This paper investigates the training dynamics of transformers by gradient descent through the lens of non-linear regression tasks. The contextual generalization here can be attained via learning the template function for each task in-context, where all template functions lie in a linear space with $m$ basis functions. We analyze the training dynamics of one-layer multi-head transformers to in-contextly predict unlabeled inputs given partially labeled prompts, where the labels contain Gaussian noise and the number of examples in each prompt are not sufficient to determine the template. Under mild assumptions, we show that the training loss for a one-layer multi-head transformer converges linearly to a global minimum. Moreover, the transformer effectively learns to perform ridge regression over the basis functions. To our knowledge, this study is the first provable demonstration that transformers can learn contextual (i.e., template) information to generalize to both unseen examples and tasks when prompts contain only a small number of query-answer pairs.
Large language and vision models (LLVMs) have been driven by the generalization power of large language models (LLMs) and the advent of visual instruction tuning. Along with scaling them up directly, these models enable LLVMs to showcase powerful vision language (VL) performances by covering diverse tasks via natural language instructions. However, existing open-source LLVMs that perform comparably to closed-source LLVMs such as GPT-4V are often considered too large (e.g., 26B, 34B, and 110B parameters), having a larger number of layers. These large models demand costly, high-end resources for both training and inference. To address this issue, we present a new efficient LLVM family with 1.8B, 3.8B, and 7B LLM model sizes, Traversal of Layers (TroL), which enables the reuse of layers in a token-wise manner. This layer traversing technique simulates the effect of looking back and retracing the answering stream while increasing the number of forward propagation layers without physically adding more layers. We demonstrate that TroL employs a simple layer traversing approach yet efficiently outperforms the open-source LLVMs with larger model sizes and rivals the performances of the closed-source LLVMs with substantial sizes.
Recent studies have evaluated the creativity/novelty of large language models (LLMs) primarily from a semantic perspective, using benchmarks from cognitive science. However, accessing the novelty in scholarly publications is a largely unexplored area in evaluating LLMs. In this paper, we introduce a scholarly novelty benchmark (SchNovel) to evaluate LLMs' ability to assess novelty in scholarly papers. SchNovel consists of 15000 pairs of papers across six fields sampled from the arXiv dataset with publication dates spanning 2 to 10 years apart. In each pair, the more recently published paper is assumed to be more novel. Additionally, we propose RAG-Novelty, which simulates the review process taken by human reviewers by leveraging the retrieval of similar papers to assess novelty. Extensive experiments provide insights into the capabilities of different LLMs to assess novelty and demonstrate that RAG-Novelty outperforms recent baseline models.
While large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for medical question answering, there is limited work focused on tropical and infectious disease-specific exploration. We build on an opensource tropical and infectious diseases (TRINDs) dataset, expanding it to include demographic and semantic clinical and consumer augmentations yielding 11000+ prompts. We evaluate LLM performance on these, comparing generalist and medical LLMs, as well as LLM outcomes to human experts. We demonstrate through systematic experimentation, the benefit of contextual information such as demographics, location, gender, risk factors for optimal LLM response. Finally we develop a prototype of TRINDs-LM, a research tool that provides a playground to navigate how context impacts LLM outputs for health.
Large language models (LLMs) exhibit superior performance on various natural language tasks, but they are susceptible to issues stemming from outdated data and domain-specific limitations. In order to address these challenges, researchers have pursued two primary strategies, knowledge editing and retrieval augmentation, to enhance LLMs by incorporating external information from different aspects. Nevertheless, there is still a notable absence of a comprehensive survey. In this paper, we propose a review to discuss the trends in integration of knowledge and large language models, including taxonomy of methods, benchmarks, and applications. In addition, we conduct an in-depth analysis of different methods and point out potential research directions in the future. We hope this survey offers the community quick access and a comprehensive overview of this research area, with the intention of inspiring future research endeavors.