Canada

ACL 2023

Reimagining Retrieval Augmented Language Models for Answering Queries

views

retrieval augmented

provenance

database

### Welcome to ACL 2023, the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics! 
 The conference will be held in Toronto, Canada, July 9-14, 2023. 
Following the succession of the recent conferences in our field, ACL 2023 will adopt a hybrid format.
While the impact of Covid has considerably diminished in terms of traveling, obtaining visas to Canada
entails a very long process. Moreover, the global economic conditions pose challenges for many individuals to travel to conferences. Recognizing these circumstances, we know many participants may not be
able to attend the conference in person. Therefore, we are committed to providing a great virtual platform
so everyone has the opportunity to interact with other participants and enjoy the conference. Based on the
current registered participants, approxiately 30% have chosen to attend the conference virtually. Whether
you join us in person or virtually, we sincerely hope everyone has a remarkable conference experience. 
This General Chair’s message is where I express my gratitude to the many individuals who have made
enormous contributions to the conference over the past year.

Read [**ACL 2023 General Chair's message**](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WobYM7norbG4dI48s75HfJoD89qgX5a_F-6U8AteLSA/edit?usp=sharing/) in full.

##### **[Conference Handbook](https://2023.aclweb.org/downloads/acl2023-handbook.pdf)**

The Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) is the premier international scientific and professional society for people working on computational problems involving human language, a field often referred to as either computational linguistics or natural language processing.

workshop paper

Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized NLP by solving downstream tasks with little to no labeled data. Despite their versatile abilities, the larger question of their ability to reason remains ill-understood. This paper addresses reasoning in math word problems (MWPs) by studying symbolic versions of the numeric problems, since a symbolic expression is a “concise explanation” of the numeric answer. We create and use a symbolic version of the SVAMP dataset and find that GPT-3’s davinci-002 model also has good zeroshot accuracy on symbolic MWPs. To evaluate the faithfulness of the model’s reasoning, we go beyond accuracy and additionally evaluate the alignment between the final answer and the outputted reasoning, which correspond to numeric and symbolic answers respectively for MWPs. We explore a self-prompting approach to encourage the symbolic reasoning to align with the numeric answer, thus equipping the LLM with the ability to provide a concise and verifiable reasoning and making it more interpretable. Surprisingly, self-prompting also improves the symbolic accuracy to be higher than both the numeric and symbolic accuracies, thus providing an ensembling effect. The SVAMP-Sym dataset will be released for future research on symbolic math problems.

Reasoning in Large Language Models Through Symbolic Math Word Problems

The multi-answer phenomenon, where a question may have multiple answers scattered in the document, can be well handled by humans but is challenging enough for machine reading comprehension (MRC) systems. Despite recent progress in multi-answer MRC, there lacks a systematic analysis of how this phenomenon arises and how to better address it. In this work, we design a taxonomy to categorize commonly-seen multi-answer MRC instances, with which we inspect three multi-answer datasets and analyze where the multi-answer challenge comes from. We further analyze how well different paradigms of current multi-answer MRC models deal with different types of multi-answer instances. We find that some paradigms capture well the key information in the questions while others better model the relationship between questions and contexts. We thus explore strategies to make the best of the strengths of different paradigms. Experiments show that generation models can be a promising platform to incorporate different paradigms. Our annotations and code are released for further research.

How Many Answers Should I Give? An Empirical Study of Multi-Answer Reading Comprehension

Pre-trained language models (LMs) have shown remarkable reasoning performance using explanations (or ``chain-of-thought'' (CoT)) for in-context learning. 
On the other hand, these reasoning tasks are usually presumed to be more approachable for symbolic programming. 
To make progress towards understanding in-context learning, we curate synthetic datasets containing equivalent (natural, symbolic) data pairs, where symbolic examples contain first-order logic rules and predicates from knowledge bases (KBs).
Then we revisit neuro-symbolic approaches and use Language Models as Logic Programmer (LMLP) that learns from demonstrations containing logic rules and corresponding examples to iteratively reason over KBs, recovering Prolog’s backward chaining algorithm. 
Comprehensive experiments are included to systematically compare LMLP with CoT in deductive reasoning settings, showing that LMLP enjoys more than 25% higher accuracy than CoT on length generalization benchmarks even with fewer parameters.

The Impact of Symbolic Representations on In-context Learning for Few-shot Reasoning

While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting boosts Language Models' (LM) performance on a gamut of complex reasoning tasks, the generated reasoning chain does not necessarily reflect how the model arrives at the answer (aka. faithfulness). We propose Faithful CoT, a reasoning framework involving two stages: Translation (Natural Language query → symbolic reasoning chain) and Problem Solving (reasoning chain → answer), using an LM and a deterministic solver respectively. This guarantees that the reasoning chain provides a faithful explanation of the final answer. Aside from interpretability, Faithful CoT also improves empirical performance: it outperforms standard CoT on 9 of 10 benchmarks from 4 diverse domains, with a relative accuracy gain of 6.3\% on Math Word Problems (MWP), 3.4\% on Planning, 5.5\% on Multi-hop Question Answering (QA), and 21.4\% on Relational Inference. Furthermore, with GPT-4, it sets the new state-of-the-art few-shot performance on 7 datasets (with 95.0+ accuracy on 6 of them), showing a strong synergy between faithfulness and accuracy.

Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning

Logical reasoning is central to human cognition and intelligence.
Past research of logical reasoning within AI uses formal language as knowledge representation~(and symbolic reasoners).
However, reasoning with formal language has proved
challenging~(e.g., brittleness and knowledge-acquisition bottleneck).
This paper provides a comprehensive overview on a new paradigm of logical reasoning, which uses natural language as knowledge representation~(and pretrained language models as reasoners), including philosophical definition and categorization of logical reasoning, advantages of the new paradigm, benchmarks and methods, challenges of the new paradigm, desirable tasks \& methods in the future, and relation to related NLP fields.
This new paradigm is promising since it not only alleviates many challenges of formal representation but also has advantages over end-to-end neural methods.

Logical Reasoning over Natural Language as Knowledge Representation: A Survey

Large language models have shown impressive abilities to reason over input text, however, they are prone to hallucinations. On the other hand, end-to-end knowledge graph question answering (KGQA) models output responses grounded in facts, but they still struggle with complex reasoning, such as comparison or ordinal questions. In this paper, we propose a new method for complex question answering where we combine a knowledge graph retriever based on an end-to-end KGQA model with a language model that reasons over the retrieved facts to return an answer. We observe that augmenting language model prompts with retrieved KG facts improves performance over using a language model alone by an average of 83%. In particular, we see improvements on complex questions requiring count, intersection, or multi-hop reasoning operations.

Knowledge Graph-augmented Language Models for Complex Question Answering

Natural language is among the most accessible tools for explaining decisions to humans, and large pretrained language models (PLMs) have demonstrated impressive abilities to generate coherent natural language explanations (NLE). The existing NLE research perspectives do not take the audience into account. An NLE can have high textual quality, but it might not accommodate audiences' needs and preference. To address this limitation, we propose an alternative perspective, \textit{situated NLE}, including a situated generation framework and a situated evaluation framework. On the generation side, we propose simple prompt engineering methods that adapt the NLEs to situations. In human studies, the annotators preferred the situated NLEs. On the evaluation side, we set up automated evaluation scores in lexical, semantic, and pragmatic categories. The scores can be used to select the most suitable prompts to generate NLEs. Situated NLE provides a perspective to conduct further research on automatic NLE generations.

Situated Natural Language Explanations

How to usefully encode compositional task structure has long been a core challenge in AI. Recent work in chain of thought prompting has shown that for very large neural language models (LMs), explicitly demonstrating the inferential steps involved in a target task may improve performance over end-to-end learning that focuses on the target task alone. However, chain of thought prompting has significant limitations due to its dependency on huge pretrained LMs. In this work, we present compositional fine-tuning (CFT): an approach based on explicitly decomposing a target task into component tasks, and then fine-tuning smaller LMs on a curriculum of such component tasks. We apply CFT to recommendation tasks in two domains, world travel and local dining, as well as a previously studied inferential task (sports understanding). We show that CFT outperforms end-to-end learning even with equal amounts of data, and gets consistently better as more component tasks are modeled via fine-tuning. Compared with chain of thought prompting, CFT performs at least as well using LMs only 7.4% of the size, and is moreover applicable to task domains for which data are not available during pretraining.

Learning to Perform Complex Tasks through Compositional Fine-Tuning of Language Models

Recent work has shown that prompting language models with code-like representations of natural language leads to performance improvements on structured reasoning tasks. However, such tasks comprise only a small subset of all natural language tasks. In our work, we seek to answer whether or not code-prompting is the preferred way of interacting with language models in general. We compare code and text prompts across three popular GPT models (davinci, code-davinci-002, and text-davinci-002) on a broader selection of tasks (e.g., QA, sentiment, summarization) and find that with few exceptions, code prompts do not consistently outperform text prompts. Furthermore, we show that the style of code prompt has a large effect on performance for some but not all tasks and that fine-tuning on text instructions leads to better relative performance of code prompts.

Exploring the Curious Case of Code Prompts

Saliency maps can explain a neural model's predictions by identifying important input features. They are difficult to interpret for laypeople, especially for instances with many features. In order to make them more accessible, we formalize the underexplored task of translating saliency maps into natural language and compare methods that address two key challenges of this approach -- what and how to verbalize. In both automatic and human evaluation setups, using token-level attributions from text classification tasks, we compare two novel methods (search-based and instruction-based verbalizations) against conventional feature importance representations (heatmap visualizations and extractive rationales), measuring simulatability, faithfulness, helpfulness and ease of understanding. Instructing GPT-3.5 to generate saliency map verbalizations yields plausible explanations which include associations, abstractive summarization and commonsense reasoning, achieving by far the highest human ratings, but they are not faithfully capturing numeric information and are inconsistent in their interpretation of the task. In comparison, our search-based, model-free verbalization approach efficiently completes templated verbalizations, is faithful by design, but falls short in helpfulness and simulatability. Our results suggest that saliency map verbalization makes feature attribution explanations more comprehensible and less cognitively challenging to humans than conventional representations.

Next from ACL 2023

Reasoning in Large Language Models Through Symbolic Math Word Problems

Similar lecture

Reimagining Retrieval Augmented Language Models for Answering Queries