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

Inspired by the superior language abilities of large language models (LLM), large vision-language models (LVLM) have been recently explored by integrating powerful LLMs for improving the performance on complex multimodal tasks. Despite the promising progress on LVLMs, we find that LVLMs suffer from the hallucination problem, i.e. they tend to generate objects that are inconsistent with the target images in the descriptions. To investigate it, this work presents the first systematic study on object hallucination of LVLMs. We conduct the evaluation experiments on several representative LVLMs, and show that they mostly suffer from severe object hallucination issue. We further discuss that the visual instructions may influence the hallucination, and find that: objects that frequently occur in the visual instructions or co-occur with the image objects, are obviously prone to be hallucinated by LVLMs. Besides, we find that existing evaluation methods might be affected by the input instructions and generation styles of LVLMs. Thus, we further design an improved evaluation method for object hallucination by proposing a polling-based query method called \emph{POPE}. Experiment results demonstrate that our POPE can evaluate the object hallucination in a more stable and flexible way. Our codes and data are publicly available at //github.com/RUCAIBox/POPE.

We present a method for extracting general modules for ontologies formulated in the description logic ALC. A module for an ontology is an ideally substantially smaller ontology that preserves all entailments for a user-specified set of terms. As such, it has applications such as ontology reuse and ontology analysis. Different from classical modules, general modules may use axioms not explicitly present in the input ontology, which allows for additional conciseness. So far, general modules have only been investigated for lightweight description logics. We present the first work that considers the more expressive description logic ALC. In particular, our contribution is a new method based on uniform interpolation supported by some new theoretical results. Our evaluation indicates that our general modules are often smaller than classical modules and uniform interpolants computed by the state-of-the-art, and compared with uniform interpolants, can be computed in a significantly shorter time. Moreover, our method can be used for, and in fact improves, the computation of uniform interpolants and classical modules.

The keyphrase extraction task refers to the automatic selection of phrases from a given document to summarize its core content. State-of-the-art (SOTA) performance has recently been achieved by embedding-based algorithms, which rank candidates according to how similar their embeddings are to document embeddings. However, such solutions either struggle with the document and candidate length discrepancies or fail to fully utilize the pre-trained language model (PLM) without further fine-tuning. To this end, in this paper, we propose a simple yet effective unsupervised approach, PromptRank, based on the PLM with an encoder-decoder architecture. Specifically, PromptRank feeds the document into the encoder and calculates the probability of generating the candidate with a designed prompt by the decoder. We extensively evaluate the proposed PromptRank on six widely used benchmarks. PromptRank outperforms the SOTA approach MDERank, improving the F1 score relatively by 34.18%, 24.87%, and 17.57% for 5, 10, and 15 returned results, respectively. This demonstrates the great potential of using prompt for unsupervised keyphrase extraction. We release our code at //github.com/HLT-NLP/PromptRank.

Lexical matching remains the de facto evaluation method for open-domain question answering (QA). Unfortunately, lexical matching fails completely when a plausible candidate answer does not appear in the list of gold answers, which is increasingly the case as we shift from extractive to generative models. The recent success of large language models (LLMs) for QA aggravates lexical matching failures since candidate answers become longer, thereby making matching with the gold answers even more challenging. Without accurate evaluation, the true progress in open-domain QA remains unknown. In this paper, we conduct a thorough analysis of various open-domain QA models, including LLMs, by manually evaluating their answers on a subset of NQ-open, a popular benchmark. Our assessments reveal that while the true performance of all models is significantly underestimated, the performance of the InstructGPT (zero-shot) LLM increases by nearly +60%, making it on par with existing top models, and the InstructGPT (few-shot) model actually achieves a new state-of-the-art on NQ-open. We also find that more than 50% of lexical matching failures are attributed to semantically equivalent answers. We further demonstrate that regex matching ranks QA models consistent with human judgments, although still suffering from unnecessary strictness. Finally, we demonstrate that automated evaluation models are a reasonable surrogate for lexical matching in some circumstances, but not for long-form answers generated by LLMs. The automated models struggle in detecting hallucinations in LLM answers and are thus unable to evaluate LLMs. At this time, there appears to be no substitute for human evaluation.

Large language models (LLMs) pretrained on vast source code have achieved prominent progress in code intelligence. However, existing code LLMs have two main limitations in terms of architecture and pretraining tasks. First, they often adopt a specific architecture (encoder-only or decoder-only) or rely on a unified encoder-decoder network for different downstream tasks. The former paradigm is limited by inflexibility in applications while in the latter, the model is treated as a single system for all tasks, leading to suboptimal performance on a subset of tasks. Secondly, they often employ a limited set of pretraining objectives which might not be relevant to some downstream tasks and hence result in substantial performance degrade. To address these limitations, we propose ``CodeT5+'', a family of encoder-decoder LLMs for code in which component modules can be flexibly combined to suit a wide range of downstream code tasks. Such flexibility is enabled by our proposed mixture of pretraining objectives to mitigate the pretrain-finetune discrepancy. These objectives cover span denoising, contrastive learning, text-code matching, and causal LM pretraining tasks, on both unimodal and bimodal multilingual code corpora. Furthermore, we propose to initialize CodeT5+ with frozen off-the-shelf LLMs without training from scratch to efficiently scale up our models, and explore instruction-tuning to align with natural language instructions. We extensively evaluate CodeT5+ on over 20 code-related benchmarks in different settings, including zero-shot, finetuning, and instruction-tuning. We observe state-of-the-art (SoTA) model performance on various code-related tasks, such as code generation and completion, math programming, and text-to-code retrieval tasks. Particularly, our instruction-tuned CodeT5+ 16B achieves new SoTA results on HumanEval code generation task against other open code LLMs.

The remarkable achievements of Large Language Models (LLMs) have led to the emergence of a novel recommendation paradigm -- Recommendation via LLM (RecLLM). Nevertheless, it is important to note that LLMs may contain social prejudices, and therefore, the fairness of recommendations made by RecLLM requires further investigation. To avoid the potential risks of RecLLM, it is imperative to evaluate the fairness of RecLLM with respect to various sensitive attributes on the user side. Due to the differences between the RecLLM paradigm and the traditional recommendation paradigm, it is problematic to directly use the fairness benchmark of traditional recommendation. To address the dilemma, we propose a novel benchmark called Fairness of Recommendation via LLM (FaiRLLM). This benchmark comprises carefully crafted metrics and a dataset that accounts for eight sensitive attributes1 in two recommendation scenarios: music and movies. By utilizing our FaiRLLM benchmark, we conducted an evaluation of ChatGPT and discovered that it still exhibits unfairness to some sensitive attributes when generating recommendations. Our code and dataset can be found at //github.com/jizhi-zhang/FaiRLLM.

Information retrieval (IR) plays a crucial role in locating relevant resources from vast amounts of data, and its applications have evolved from traditional knowledge bases to modern search engines (SEs). The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has further revolutionized the field by enabling users to interact with search systems in natural language. In this paper, we explore the advantages and disadvantages of LLMs and SEs, highlighting their respective strengths in understanding user-issued queries and retrieving up-to-date information. To leverage the benefits of both paradigms while circumventing their limitations, we propose InteR, a novel framework that facilitates knowledge refinement through interaction between SEs and LLMs. InteR allows SEs to refine knowledge in query using LLM-generated summaries and enables LLMs to enhance prompts using SE-retrieved documents. This iterative refinement process augments the inputs of SEs and LLMs, leading to more accurate retrieval. Experimental evaluations on two large-scale retrieval benchmarks demonstrate that InteR achieves superior zero-shot document retrieval performance compared to state-of-the-art methods, regardless of the use of relevance judgement.

Multimodal sentiment analysis is an important area for understanding the user's internal states. Deep learning methods were effective, but the problem of poor interpretability has gradually gained attention. Previous works have attempted to use attention weights or vector distributions to provide interpretability. However, their explanations were not intuitive and can be influenced by different trained models. This study proposed a novel approach to provide interpretability by converting nonverbal modalities into text descriptions and by using large-scale language models for sentiment predictions. This provides an intuitive approach to directly interpret what models depend on with respect to making decisions from input texts, thus significantly improving interpretability. Specifically, we convert descriptions based on two feature patterns for the audio modality and discrete action units for the facial modality. Experimental results on two sentiment analysis tasks demonstrated that the proposed approach maintained, or even improved effectiveness for sentiment analysis compared to baselines using conventional features, with the highest improvement of 2.49% on the F1 score. The results also showed that multimodal descriptions have similar characteristics on fusing modalities as those of conventional fusion methods. The results demonstrated that the proposed approach is interpretable and effective for multimodal sentiment analysis.

As a crucial component in task-oriented dialog systems, the Natural Language Generation (NLG) module converts a dialog act represented in a semantic form into a response in natural language. The success of traditional template-based or statistical models typically relies on heavily annotated data, which is infeasible for new domains. Therefore, it is pivotal for an NLG system to generalize well with limited labelled data in real applications. To this end, we present FewShotWoz, the first NLG benchmark to simulate the few-shot learning setting in task-oriented dialog systems. Further, we develop the SC-GPT model. It is pre-trained on a large set of annotated NLG corpus to acquire the controllable generation ability, and fine-tuned with only a few domain-specific labels to adapt to new domains. Experiments on FewShotWoz and the large Multi-Domain-WOZ datasets show that the proposed SC-GPT significantly outperforms existing methods, measured by various automatic metrics and human evaluations.

User engagement is a critical metric for evaluating the quality of open-domain dialogue systems. Prior work has focused on conversation-level engagement by using heuristically constructed features such as the number of turns and the total time of the conversation. In this paper, we investigate the possibility and efficacy of estimating utterance-level engagement and define a novel metric, {\em predictive engagement}, for automatic evaluation of open-domain dialogue systems. Our experiments demonstrate that (1) human annotators have high agreement on assessing utterance-level engagement scores; (2) conversation-level engagement scores can be predicted from properly aggregated utterance-level engagement scores. Furthermore, we show that the utterance-level engagement scores can be learned from data. These scores can improve automatic evaluation metrics for open-domain dialogue systems, as shown by correlation with human judgements. This suggests that predictive engagement can be used as a real-time feedback for training better dialogue models.