Singapore

Recent applications of LLMs in Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) systems have shown impressive results, but the use of shortcuts, mechanisms triggered by features spuriously correlated to the true label, has emerged as a potential threat to their reliability. We analyze the problem from two angles: LLMs as editors, guided to edit text to mislead LLMs; and LLMs as readers, who answer questions based on the edited text.
We introduce a framework that guides an editor to add potential shortcuts-triggers to samples.
Using GPT4 as the editor, we find it can successfully edit trigger shortcut in samples that fool LLMs. Analysing LLMs as readers, we observe that even capable LLMs can be deceived using shortcut knowledge. Strikingly, we discover that GPT4 can be deceived by its own edits (15% drop in F1).
Our findings highlight inherent vulnerabilities of LLMs to shortcut manipulations. We publish ShortcutQA, a curated dataset generated by our framework for future research.

EMNLP 2023

Guiding LLM to Fool Itself: Automatically Imbuing Multiple Shortcut Triggers in Question Answering Samples

shortcuts

large language model

reading comprehension

workshop paper

**Welcome to EMNLP 2023!**

On behalf of the EMNLP 2023 Organizing Committee, I extend a warm and heartfelt welcome to all of you to the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). It is with immense pleasure and excitement that we gather here in Singapore, a vibrant hub of innovation and technological advancement.

The conference program is packed with insightful presentations, thought-provoking workshops, and engaging networking opportunities. In addition to the technical sessions, we have also planned several social events that will provide you with the opportunity to connect with your colleagues.

The conference is held in person at the Resorts World Convention Centre in Singapore, and available on-line with the help of Underline.

For those in Singapore, I hope that you will find time to explore the exciting Sentosa Island, Gardens by the Bay, Singapore Botanic Gardens and the many other attractions unique to Singapore.

Of course, we are grateful to our sponsors and partners for their generous support of EMNLP 2023, whose contributions make it possible for us to host this world-class event.

Yuji Matsumoto (RIKEN AIP) 
EMNLP 2023 General Chair

To access the **EMNLP 2023** event page on Underline, you need to register for the Conference. 
Please follow **[this link](https://2023.emnlp.org/registration/)** for more details.

EMNLP 2023 took place in Singapore from Dec 6th to Dec 10th, 2023.

Language model prompt optimization research has shown that semantically and grammatically well-formed manually crafted prompts are routinely outperformed by automatically generated token sequences with no apparent meaning or syntactic structure, including sequences of vectors from a model's embedding space. We use machine-generated prompts to probe how models respond to input that is not composed of natural language expressions. We study the behavior of models of different sizes in multiple semantic tasks in response to both continuous and discrete machine-generated prompts, and compare it to the behavior in response to human-generated natural-language prompts. Even when producing a similar output, machine-generated and human prompts trigger different response patterns through the network processing pathways, including different perplexities, different attention and output entropy distributions, and different unit activation profiles. We provide preliminary insight into the nature of the units activated by different prompt types, suggesting that only natural language prompts recruit a genuinely linguistic circuit.

Unnatural language processing: How do language models handle machine-generated prompts? | VIDEO

Concepts play a pivotal role in various human
cognitive functions, including learning, reasoning and communication. However, there is very little work on endowing machines with the ability to form and reason with concepts. In particular, state-of-the-art large language models
(LLMs) work at the level of tokens, not concepts.

In this work, we analyze how well contemporary LLMs capture human concepts and their structure. We then discuss ways to develop concept-aware LLMs, taking place at different stages of the pipeline. We sketch a method for
pretraining LLMs using concepts, and also explore the simpler approach that uses the output of existing LLMs. Despite its simplicity, our
proof-of-concept is shown to better match human intuition, as well as improve the robustness of predictions. These preliminary results underscore the promise of concept-aware LLMs.

Towards Concept-Aware Large Language Models

The ability to identify and control different kinds of linguistic information encoded in vector representations of words has many use cases, especially for explainability and bias removal. This is usually done via a set of simple classification tasks, termed probes, to evaluate the information encoded in the embedding space. However, the involvement of a trainable classifier leads to entanglement between the probe's results and the classifier's nature. As a result, contemporary works on probing include tasks that do not involve training of auxiliary models. In this work we introduce the term indicator tasks for non-trainable tasks which are used to query embedding spaces for the existence of certain properties, and claim that this kind of tasks may point to a direction opposite to probes, and that this contradiction complicates the decision on whether a property exists in an embedding space. We demonstrate our claims with two test cases, one dealing with gender debiasing and another with the erasure of morphological information from embedding spaces. We show that the application of a suitable indicator provides a more accurate picture of the information captured and removed compared to probes. We thus conclude that indicator tasks should be implemented and taken into consideration when eliciting information from embedded representations.

Is Probing All You Need? Indicator Tasks as an Alternative to Probing Embedding Spaces

Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) are trained on vast unlabeled data, rich in world knowledge. This fact has sparked the interest of the community in quantifying the amount of factual knowledge present in PLMs, as this explains their performance on downstream tasks, and potentially justifies their use as knowledge bases. In this work, we survey methods and datasets that are used to probe PLMs for factual knowledge. Our contributions are: (1) We propose a categorization scheme for factual probing methods that is based on how their inputs, outputs and the probed PLMs are adapted; (2) We provide an overview of the datasets used for factual probing; (3) We synthesize insights about knowledge retention and prompt optimization in PLMs, analyze obstacles to adopting PLMs as knowledge bases and outline directions for future work.

Give Me the Facts! A Survey on Factual Knowledge Probing in Pre-trained Language Models

Adjusting for latent covariates is crucial for estimating causal effects from observational textual data. Most existing methods only account for confounding covariates that affect both treatment and outcome, potentially leading to biased causal effects. This bias arises from insufficient consideration of non-confounding covariates, which are relevant only to either the treatment or the outcome. In this work, we aim to mitigate the bias by unveiling interactions between different variables to disentangle the non-confounding covariates when estimating causal effects from text. The disentangling process ensures covariates only contribute to their respective objectives, enabling independence between variables. Additionally, we impose a constraint to balance representations from the treated group and control group to alleviate selection bias. We conduct experiments on two different treatment factors under various scenarios, and the proposed model significantly outperforms recent strong baselines. Furthermore, our thorough analysis on earnings call transcripts demonstrates that our model can effectively disentangle the variables, and further investigations into real-world scenarios provide guidance for investors to make informed decisions.

Causal Inference from Text: Unveiling Interactions between Variables

Learned representations at the level of characters, sub-words, words, and sentences, have each contributed to advances in understanding different NLP tasks and linguistic phenomena. However, learning textual embeddings is costly as they are tokenization specific and require different models to be trained for each level of abstraction. We introduce a novel language representation model which can learn to compress to different levels of abstraction at different layers of the same model. We apply Nonparametric Variational Information Bottleneck (NVIB) to stacked Transformer self-attention layers in the encoder, which encourages an information-theoretic compression of the representations through the model. We find that the layers within the model correspond to increasing levels of abstraction and that their representations are more linguistically informed. Finally, we show that NVIB compression results in a model which is more robust to adversarial perturbations.

Learning to Abstract with Nonparametric Variational Information Bottleneck

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive performance on a range of NLP tasks, due to the general-purpose linguistic knowledge acquired during pretraining. Existing model interpretability research (Tenney et al., 2019) suggests that a linguistic hierarchy emerges in the LLM layers, with lower layers better suited to solving syntactic tasks and higher layers employed for semantic processing. Yet, little is known about how encodings of different linguistic phenomena interact within the models and to what extent processing of linguistically-related categories relies on the same, shared model representations. In this paper, we propose a framework for testing the joint encoding of linguistic categories in LLMs. Focusing on syntax, we find evidence of joint encoding both at the same (related part-of-speech (POS) classes) and different (POS classes and related syntactic dependency relations) levels of linguistic hierarchy. Our cross-lingual experiments show that the same patterns hold across languages in multilingual LLMs.

Probing LLMs for Joint Encoding of Linguistic Categories

While recently developed NLP explainability methods let us open the black box in various ways (Madsen et al., 2022), a missing ingredient in this endeavor is an interactive tool offering a conversational interface. Such a dialogue system can help users explore datasets and models with explanations in a contextualized manner, e.g. via clarification or follow-up questions, and through a natural language interface. We adapt the conversational explanation framework TalkToModel (Slack et al., 2022) to the NLP domain, add new NLP-specific operations such as free-text rationalization, and illustrate its generalizability on three NLP tasks (dialogue act classification, question answering, hate speech detection). To recognize user queries for explanations, we evaluate fine-tuned and few-shot prompting models and implement a novel Adapter-based approach. We then conduct two user studies on (1) the perceived correctness and helpfulness of the dialogues, and (2) the simulatability, i.e. how objectively helpful dialogical explanations are for humans in figuring out the model's predicted label when it's not shown. We found rationalization and feature attribution were helpful in explaining the model behavior. Moreover, users could more reliably predict the model outcome based on an explanation dialogue rather than one-off explanations.

InterroLang: Exploring NLP Models and Datasets through Dialogue-based Explanations

The potential of using a large language model (LLM) as a knowledge base (KB) has sparked significant interest. To manage the knowledge acquired by LLMs, we need to ensure that the editing of learned facts respects internal logical constraints, which are known as dependency of knowledge. Existing work on editing LLMs has partially addressed the issue of dependency, when the editing of a fact should apply to its lexical variations without disrupting irrelevant ones. However, they neglect the dependency between a fact and its logical implications. We propose an evaluation protocol with an accompanying question-answering dataset, DepEdit, that provides a comprehensive assessment of the editing process considering the above notions of dependency. Our protocol involves setting up a controlled environment in which we edit facts and monitor their impact on LLMs, along with their implications based on If-Then rules. Extensive experiments on DepEdit show that existing knowledge editing methods are sensitive to the surface form of knowledge, and that they have limited performance in inferring the implications of edited facts.

Evaluating Dependencies in Fact Editing for Language Models: Specificity and Implication Awareness

An important assumption that comes with using LLMs on psycholinguistic data has gone unverified. LLM-based predictions are based on subword tokenization, not decomposition of words into morphemes. Does that matter? We carefully test this by comparing surprisal estimates using orthographic, morphological, and BPE tokenization against reading time data. Our results replicate previous findings and provide evidence that in the aggregate, predictions using BPE tokenization do not suffer relative to morphological and orthographic segmentation. However, a finer-grained analysis points to potential issues with relying on BPE-based tokenization, as well as providing promising results involving morphologically-aware surprisal estimates and suggesting a new method for evaluating morphological prediction.

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2023

Unnatural language processing: How do language models handle machine-generated prompts? | VIDEO

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2023

Unnatural language processing: How do language models handle machine-generated prompts? | VIDEO

Downloads