The index of success of the researchers are now mostly measured using the Hirsch index ($h$). Our recent precise demonstration, that statistically $h \sim \sqrt {N_c} \sim \sqrt {N_p}$, where $N_p$ and $N_c$ denote respectively the total number of publications and total citations for the researcher, suggests that average number of citations per paper ($N_c/N_p$), and hence $h$, are statistical numbers (Dunbar numbers) depending on the community or network to which the researcher belongs. We show here, extending our earlier observations, that the indications of success are not reflected by the total citations $N_c$, rather by the inequalities among citations from publications to publications. Specifically, we show that for very successful authors, the yearly variations in the Gini index ($g$, giving the average inequality of citations for the publications) and the Kolkata index ($k$, giving the fraction of total citations received by the top $1 - k$ fraction of publications; $k = 0.80$ corresponds to Pareto's 80/20 law) approach each other to $g = k \simeq 0.82$, signaling a precursor for the arrival of (or departure from) the Self-Organized Critical (SOC) state of his/her publication statistics. Analyzing the citation statistics (from Google Scholar) of thirty successful scientists throughout their recorded publication history, we find that the $g$ and $k$ for very successful among them (mostly Nobel Laureates, highest rank Stanford Cite-Scorers, and a few others) reach and hover just above (and then) below that $g = k \simeq 0.82$ mark, while for others they remain below that mark. We also find that for all the lower (than the SOC mark 0.82) values of $k$ and $g$ fit a linear relationship $k = 1/2 + cg$, with $c = 0.39$.
相關內容
We call into question the recently popularized method of direct model editing as a means of correcting factual errors in LLM generations. We contrast model editing with three similar but distinct approaches that pursue better defined objectives: (1) retrieval-based architectures, which decouple factual memory from inference and linguistic capabilities embodied in LLMs; (2) concept erasure methods, which aim at preventing systemic bias in generated text; and (3) attribution methods, which aim at grounding generations into identified textual sources. We argue that direct model editing cannot be trusted as a systematic remedy for the disadvantages inherent to LLMs, and while it has proven potential in improving model explainability, it opens risks by reinforcing the notion that models can be trusted for factuality. We call for cautious promotion and application of model editing as part of the LLM deployment process, and for responsibly limiting the use cases of LLMs to those not relying on editing as a critical component.
Tabular data is one of the most commonly used types of data in machine learning. Despite recent advances in neural nets (NNs) for tabular data, there is still an active discussion on whether or not NNs generally outperform gradient-boosted decision trees (GBDTs) on tabular data, with several recent works arguing either that GBDTs consistently outperform NNs on tabular data, or vice versa. In this work, we take a step back and question the importance of this debate. To this end, we conduct the largest tabular data analysis to date, comparing 19 algorithms across 176 datasets, and we find that the 'NN vs. GBDT' debate is overemphasized: for a surprisingly high number of datasets, either the performance difference between GBDTs and NNs is negligible, or light hyperparameter tuning on a GBDT is more important than choosing between NNs and GBDTs. Next, we analyze dozens of metafeatures to determine what \emph{properties} of a dataset make NNs or GBDTs better-suited to perform well. For example, we find that GBDTs are much better than NNs at handling skewed or heavy-tailed feature distributions and other forms of dataset irregularities. Our insights act as a guide for practitioners to determine which techniques may work best on their dataset. Finally, with the goal of accelerating tabular data research, we release the TabZilla Benchmark Suite: a collection of the 36 'hardest' of the datasets we study. Our benchmark suite, codebase, and all raw results are available at //github.com/naszilla/tabzilla.
Multilingual large-scale Pretrained Language Models (PLMs) have been shown to store considerable amounts of factual knowledge, but large variations are observed across languages. With the ultimate goal of ensuring that users with different language backgrounds obtain consistent feedback from the same model, we study the cross-lingual consistency (CLC) of factual knowledge in various multilingual PLMs. To this end, we propose a Ranking-based Consistency (RankC) metric to evaluate knowledge consistency across languages independently from accuracy. Using this metric, we conduct an in-depth analysis of the determining factors for CLC, both at model level and at language-pair level. Among other results, we find that increasing model size leads to higher factual probing accuracy in most languages, but does not improve cross-lingual consistency. Finally, we conduct a case study on CLC when new factual associations are inserted in the PLMs via model editing. Results on a small sample of facts inserted in English reveal a clear pattern whereby the new piece of knowledge transfers only to languages with which English has a high RankC score.
Large language models have shown remarkable aptitude in code generation, but still struggle on challenging tasks. Self-repair -- in which the model debugs and fixes mistakes in its own code -- has recently become a popular way to boost performance in these settings. However, only very limited studies on how and when self-repair works effectively exist in the literature, and one might wonder to what extent a model is really capable of repairing mistakes in code which was originally generated by that very same model. In this paper, we analyze Code Llama, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4's ability to perform self-repair on problems taken from HumanEval or APPS, finding that when the cost of carrying out repair is taken into account, gains are often modest, vary significantly between subsets of the data, and are sometimes not present at all. We hypothesize that this is because self-repair is bottlenecked by the model's ability to provide feedback on its own code; boosting the feedback with stronger models, we observe performance gains even in settings where the model does not benefit from self-repair. Finally, we find that providing the model with feedback from human participants greatly benefits repair even for GPT-4, and carry out a brief qualitative analysis of the differences observed.
Guidance in conditional diffusion generation is of great importance for sample quality and controllability. However, existing guidance schemes are to be desired. On one hand, mainstream methods such as classifier guidance and classifier-free guidance both require extra training with labeled data, which is time-consuming and unable to adapt to new conditions. On the other hand, training-free methods such as universal guidance, though more flexible, have yet to demonstrate comparable performance. In this work, through a comprehensive investigation into the design space, we show that it is possible to achieve significant performance improvements over existing guidance schemes by leveraging off-the-shelf classifiers in a training-free fashion, enjoying the best of both worlds. Employing calibration as a general guideline, we propose several pre-conditioning techniques to better exploit pretrained off-the-shelf classifiers for guiding diffusion generation. Extensive experiments on ImageNet validate our proposed method, showing that state-of-the-art diffusion models (DDPM, EDM, DiT) can be further improved (up to 20%) using off-the-shelf classifiers with barely any extra computational cost. With the proliferation of publicly available pretrained classifiers, our proposed approach has great potential and can be readily scaled up to text-to-image generation tasks. The code is available at //github.com/AlexMaOLS/EluCD/tree/main.
The reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) play a pivotal role in the realm of embodied artificial intelligence. Although there are effective methods like program-of-thought prompting for LLMs which uses programming language to tackle complex reasoning tasks, the specific impact of code data on the improvement of reasoning capabilities remains under-explored. To address this gap, we propose complexity-impacted reasoning score (CIRS), which combines structural and logical attributes, to measure the correlation between code and reasoning abilities. Specifically, we use the abstract syntax tree to encode the structural information and calculate logical complexity by considering the difficulty and the cyclomatic complexity. Through an empirical analysis, we find not all code data of complexity can be learned or understood by LLMs. Optimal level of complexity is critical to the improvement of reasoning abilities by program-aided prompting. Then we design an auto-synthesizing and stratifying algorithm, and apply it to instruction generation for mathematical reasoning and code data filtering for code generation tasks. Extensive results demonstrates the effectiveness of our proposed approach. Code will be integrated into the EasyInstruct framework at //github.com/zjunlp/EasyInstruct.
Text Classification is the most essential and fundamental problem in Natural Language Processing. While numerous recent text classification models applied the sequential deep learning technique, graph neural network-based models can directly deal with complex structured text data and exploit global information. Many real text classification applications can be naturally cast into a graph, which captures words, documents, and corpus global features. In this survey, we bring the coverage of methods up to 2023, including corpus-level and document-level graph neural networks. We discuss each of these methods in detail, dealing with the graph construction mechanisms and the graph-based learning process. As well as the technological survey, we look at issues behind and future directions addressed in text classification using graph neural networks. We also cover datasets, evaluation metrics, and experiment design and present a summary of published performance on the publicly available benchmarks. Note that we present a comprehensive comparison between different techniques and identify the pros and cons of various evaluation metrics in this survey.
Language model pre-training has proven to be useful in learning universal language representations. As a state-of-the-art language model pre-training model, BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers) has achieved amazing results in many language understanding tasks. In this paper, we conduct exhaustive experiments to investigate different fine-tuning methods of BERT on text classification task and provide a general solution for BERT fine-tuning. Finally, the proposed solution obtains new state-of-the-art results on eight widely-studied text classification datasets.
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) for representation learning of graphs broadly follow a neighborhood aggregation framework, where the representation vector of a node is computed by recursively aggregating and transforming feature vectors of its neighboring nodes. Many GNN variants have been proposed and have achieved state-of-the-art results on both node and graph classification tasks. However, despite GNNs revolutionizing graph representation learning, there is limited understanding of their representational properties and limitations. Here, we present a theoretical framework for analyzing the expressive power of GNNs in capturing different graph structures. Our results characterize the discriminative power of popular GNN variants, such as Graph Convolutional Networks and GraphSAGE, and show that they cannot learn to distinguish certain simple graph structures. We then develop a simple architecture that is provably the most expressive among the class of GNNs and is as powerful as the Weisfeiler-Lehman graph isomorphism test. We empirically validate our theoretical findings on a number of graph classification benchmarks, and demonstrate that our model achieves state-of-the-art performance.
In recent years, DBpedia, Freebase, OpenCyc, Wikidata, and YAGO have been published as noteworthy large, cross-domain, and freely available knowledge graphs. Although extensively in use, these knowledge graphs are hard to compare against each other in a given setting. Thus, it is a challenge for researchers and developers to pick the best knowledge graph for their individual needs. In our recent survey, we devised and applied data quality criteria to the above-mentioned knowledge graphs. Furthermore, we proposed a framework for finding the most suitable knowledge graph for a given setting. With this paper we intend to ease the access to our in-depth survey by presenting simplified rules that map individual data quality requirements to specific knowledge graphs. However, this paper does not intend to replace our previously introduced decision-support framework. For an informed decision on which KG is best for you we still refer to our in-depth survey.
小貼士
登錄享
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191