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

Video-language pre-training (VLP) has become increasingly important due to its ability to generalize to various vision and language tasks. However, existing egocentric VLP frameworks utilize separate video and language encoders and learn task-specific cross-modal information only during fine-tuning, limiting the development of a unified system. In this work, we introduce the second generation of egocentric video-language pre-training (EgoVLPv2), a significant improvement from the previous generation, by incorporating cross-modal fusion directly into the video and language backbones. EgoVLPv2 learns strong video-text representation during pre-training and reuses the cross-modal attention modules to support different downstream tasks in a flexible and efficient manner, reducing fine-tuning costs. Moreover, our proposed fusion in the backbone strategy is more lightweight and compute-efficient than stacking additional fusion-specific layers. Extensive experiments on a wide range of VL tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of EgoVLPv2 by achieving consistent state-of-the-art performance over strong baselines across all downstream. Our project page can be found at //shramanpramanick.github.io/EgoVLPv2/.

Logical reasoning consistently plays a fundamental and significant role in the domains of knowledge engineering and artificial intelligence. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a noteworthy innovation in natural language processing (NLP), exhibiting impressive achievements across various classic NLP tasks. However, the question of whether LLMs can effectively address the task of logical reasoning, which requires gradual cognitive inference similar to human intelligence, remains unanswered. To this end, we aim to bridge this gap and provide comprehensive evaluations in this paper. Firstly, to offer systematic evaluations, we select fifteen typical logical reasoning datasets and organize them into deductive, inductive, abductive and mixed-form reasoning settings. Considering the comprehensiveness of evaluations, we include three representative LLMs (i.e., text-davinci-003, ChatGPT and BARD) and evaluate them on all selected datasets under zero-shot, one-shot and three-shot settings. Secondly, different from previous evaluations relying only on simple metrics (e.g., accuracy), we propose fine-level evaluations from objective and subjective manners, covering both answers and explanations. Additionally, to uncover the logical flaws of LLMs, problematic cases will be attributed to five error types from two dimensions, i.e., evidence selection process and reasoning process. Thirdly, to avoid the influences of knowledge bias and purely focus on benchmarking the logical reasoning capability of LLMs, we propose a new dataset with neutral content. It contains 3,000 samples and covers deductive, inductive and abductive settings. Based on the in-depth evaluations, this paper finally forms a general evaluation scheme of logical reasoning capability from six dimensions. It reflects the pros and cons of LLMs and gives guiding directions for future works.

The progress in the generation of synthetic images has made it crucial to assess their quality. While several metrics have been proposed to assess the rendering of images, it is crucial for Text-to-Image (T2I) models, which generate images based on a prompt, to consider additional aspects such as to which extent the generated image matches the important content of the prompt. Moreover, although the generated images usually result from a random starting point, the influence of this one is generally not considered. In this article, we propose a new metric based on prompt templates to study the alignment between the content specified in the prompt and the corresponding generated images. It allows us to better characterize the alignment in terms of the type of the specified objects, their number, and their color. We conducted a study on several recent T2I models about various aspects. An additional interesting result we obtained with our approach is that image quality can vary drastically depending on the latent noise used as a seed for the images. We also quantify the influence of the number of concepts in the prompt, their order as well as their (color) attributes. Finally, our method allows us to identify some latent seeds that produce better images than others, opening novel directions of research on this understudied topic.

Recent advances in generative pre-trained transformer large language models have emphasised the potential risks of unfair use of artificial intelligence (AI) generated content in an academic environment and intensified efforts in searching for solutions to detect such content. The paper examines the general functionality of detection tools for artificial intelligence generated text and evaluates them based on accuracy and error type analysis. Specifically, the study seeks to answer research questions about whether existing detection tools can reliably differentiate between human-written text and ChatGPT-generated text, and whether machine translation and content obfuscation techniques affect the detection of AI-generated text. The research covers 12 publicly available tools and two commercial systems (Turnitin and PlagiarismCheck) that are widely used in the academic setting. The researchers conclude that the available detection tools are neither accurate nor reliable and have a main bias towards classifying the output as human-written rather than detecting AI-generated text. Furthermore, content obfuscation techniques significantly worsen the performance of tools. The study makes several significant contributions. First, it summarises up-to-date similar scientific and non-scientific efforts in the field. Second, it presents the result of one of the most comprehensive tests conducted so far, based on a rigorous research methodology, an original document set, and a broad coverage of tools. Third, it discusses the implications and drawbacks of using detection tools for AI-generated text in academic settings.

Political polling is a multi-billion dollar industry with outsized influence on the societal trajectory of the United States and nations around the world. However, it has been challenged by factors that stress its cost, availability, and accuracy. At the same time, artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have become compelling stand-ins for human behavior, powered by increasingly sophisticated large language models (LLMs). Could AI chatbots be an effective tool for anticipating public opinion on controversial issues to the extent that they could be used by campaigns, interest groups, and polling firms? We have developed a prompt engineering methodology for eliciting human-like survey responses from ChatGPT, which simulate the response to a policy question of a person described by a set of demographic factors, and produce both an ordinal numeric response score and a textual justification. We execute large scale experiments, querying for thousands of simulated responses at a cost far lower than human surveys. We compare simulated data to human issue polling data from the Cooperative Election Study (CES). We find that ChatGPT is effective at anticipating both the mean level and distribution of public opinion on a variety of policy issues such as abortion bans and approval of the US Supreme Court, particularly in their ideological breakdown (correlation typically >85%). However, it is less successful at anticipating demographic-level differences. Moreover, ChatGPT tends to overgeneralize to new policy issues that arose after its training data was collected, such as US support for involvement in the war in Ukraine. Our work has implications for our understanding of the strengths and limitations of the current generation of AI chatbots as virtual publics or online listening platforms, future directions for LLM development, and applications of AI tools to the political domain. (Abridged)

Large language models (LLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in both academia and industry, owing to their unprecedented performance in various applications. As LLMs continue to play a vital role in both research and daily use, their evaluation becomes increasingly critical, not only at the task level, but also at the society level for better understanding of their potential risks. Over the past years, significant efforts have been made to examine LLMs from various perspectives. This paper presents a comprehensive review of these evaluation methods for LLMs, focusing on three key dimensions: what to evaluate, where to evaluate, and how to evaluate. Firstly, we provide an overview from the perspective of evaluation tasks, encompassing general natural language processing tasks, reasoning, medical usage, ethics, educations, natural and social sciences, agent applications, and other areas. Secondly, we answer the `where' and `how' questions by diving into the evaluation methods and benchmarks, which serve as crucial components in assessing performance of LLMs. Then, we summarize the success and failure cases of LLMs in different tasks. Finally, we shed light on several future challenges that lie ahead in LLMs evaluation. Our aim is to offer invaluable insights to researchers in the realm of LLMs evaluation, thereby aiding the development of more proficient LLMs. Our key point is that evaluation should be treated as an essential discipline to better assist the development of LLMs. We consistently maintain the related open-source materials at: //github.com/MLGroupJLU/LLM-eval-survey.

Training learnable metrics using modern language models has recently emerged as a promising method for the automatic evaluation of machine translation. However, existing human evaluation datasets for text simplification have limited annotations that are based on unitary or outdated models, making them unsuitable for this approach. To address these issues, we introduce the SimpEval corpus that contains: SimpEval_past, comprising 12K human ratings on 2.4K simplifications of 24 past systems, and SimpEval_2022, a challenging simplification benchmark consisting of over 1K human ratings of 360 simplifications including GPT-3.5 generated text. Training on SimpEval, we present LENS, a Learnable Evaluation Metric for Text Simplification. Extensive empirical results show that LENS correlates much better with human judgment than existing metrics, paving the way for future progress in the evaluation of text simplification. We also introduce Rank and Rate, a human evaluation framework that rates simplifications from several models in a list-wise manner using an interactive interface, which ensures both consistency and accuracy in the evaluation process and is used to create the SimpEval datasets.

Is it possible to train a general metric for evaluating text generation quality without human annotated ratings? Existing learned metrics either perform unsatisfactorily across text generation tasks or require human ratings for training on specific tasks. In this paper, we propose SESCORE2, a self-supervised approach for training a model-based metric for text generation evaluation. The key concept is to synthesize realistic model mistakes by perturbing sentences retrieved from a corpus. The primary advantage of the SESCORE2 is its ease of extension to many other languages while providing reliable severity estimation. We evaluate SESCORE2 and previous methods on four text generation tasks across three languages. SESCORE2 outperforms unsupervised metric PRISM on four text generation evaluation benchmarks, with a Kendall improvement of 0.078. Surprisingly, SESCORE2 even outperforms the supervised BLEURT and COMET on multiple text generation tasks. The code and data are available at //github.com/xu1998hz/SEScore2.

The ever-increasing size of language models curtails their widespread availability to the community, thereby galvanizing many companies into offering access to large language models through APIs. One particular type, suitable for dense retrieval, is a semantic embedding service that builds vector representations of input text. With a growing number of publicly available APIs, our goal in this paper is to analyze existing offerings in realistic retrieval scenarios, to assist practitioners and researchers in finding suitable services according to their needs. Specifically, we investigate the capabilities of existing semantic embedding APIs on domain generalization and multilingual retrieval. For this purpose, we evaluate these services on two standard benchmarks, BEIR and MIRACL. We find that re-ranking BM25 results using the APIs is a budget-friendly approach and is most effective in English, in contrast to the standard practice of employing them as first-stage retrievers. For non-English retrieval, re-ranking still improves the results, but a hybrid model with BM25 works best, albeit at a higher cost. We hope our work lays the groundwork for evaluating semantic embedding APIs that are critical in search and more broadly, for information access.

We propose Prefix-Adaptive Decoding (PREADD), a flexible method for controlled text generation. Unlike existing methods that use auxiliary expert models to control for attributes, PREADD does not require an external model, instead relying on linearly combining output logits from multiple prompts. Specifically, PREADD contrasts the output logits generated using a raw prompt against those generated using a prefix-prepended prompt, enabling both positive and negative control with respect to any attribute encapsulated by the prefix. We evaluate PREADD on three tasks -- toxic output mitigation, gender bias reduction, and sentiment control -- and find that PREADD outperforms not only prompting baselines, but also an auxiliary-expert control method, by 12% or more in relative gain on our main metrics for each task.