Thailand

In the field of natural language processing, correction of performance assessment for chance agreement plays a crucial role in evaluating the reliability of annotations. However, there is a notable dearth of research focusing on chance correction for assessing the reliability of sequence annotation tasks, despite their widespread prevalence in the field. To address this gap, this paper introduces a novel model for generating random annotations, which serves as the foundation for estimating chance agreement in sequence annotation tasks. Utilizing the proposed randomization model and a related comparison approach, we successfully derive the analytical form of the distribution, enabling the computation of the probable location of each annotated text segment and subsequent chance agreement estimation. Through a combination simulation and corpus-based evaluation, we successfully assess its applicability and validate its accuracy and efficacy.

ACL 2024

Estimating Agreement by Chance for Sequence Annotation

sequence annotation

chance agreement

inter-rater reliability

poster

### Welcome!
The 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024) will take place in Bangkok, Thailand from August 11th to 16th, 2024. Our Virtual Poster Sessions will take place online Thursday, August 22, 2024.

You are required to register for this event. **Please register [here](https://2024.aclweb.org/registration). **

If you have already registered, please check your inbox for an email from Underline granting you access to ACL 2024 content.

Please register!

The 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2024) will take place in Bangkok, Thailand from August 11th to 16th, 2024. More information will be announced soon.

With the advancement of large language models (LLMs) and the expansion of their context windows, existing long-context benchmarks fall short in effectively evaluating the models' comprehension and reasoning abilities in extended texts. Moreover, conventional benchmarks relying on F1 metrics often inaccurately score responses: they may undervalue correct answers that differ from the reference responses and overvalue incorrect ones that resemble the reference texts. In response to these limitations, we introduce Marathon, a novel evaluation benchmark that adopts a multiple-choice question format. It is specifically designed to overcome the constraints of previous benchmarks and provide a rapid, precise, and unbiased appraisal of the long-context comprehension skills of large language models. We conducted comprehensive evaluations on the Marathon benchmark with a range of state-of-the-art LLMs and assessed the effectiveness of various optimization strategies tailored for long-context generation. We anticipate that the Marathon benchmark and its associated leaderboard will enable a more precise and equitable evaluation of LLMs' capabilities in understanding and reasoning over extended contexts.

Marathon: A Race Through the Realm of Long Context with Large Language Models

While LLMs can provide reasoned explanations along with their answers, the nature and quality of those explanations are still poorly understood. In response, our goal is to define a detailed way of characterizing the explanation capabilities of modern models and to create a nuanced, interpretable explanation evaluation tool that can generate such characterizations automatically, without relying on expensive API calls or human annotations. Our approach is to (a) define the new task of explanation critiquing - identifying and categorizing any main flaw in an explanation and providing suggestions to address the flaw, (b) create a sizeable, human-verified dataset for this task, and (c) train an open-source, automatic critique model (called Digital Socrates) using this data. Through quantitative and qualitative analysis, we demonstrate how Digital Socrates is useful for revealing insights about student models by examining their reasoning chains, and how it can provide high-quality, nuanced, automatic evaluation of those model explanations for the first time. Digital Socrates thus fills an important gap in evaluation tools for understanding and improving the explanation behavior of models.

Digital Socrates: Evaluating LLMs through Explanation Critiques

Large language models (LLMs) are typically prompted to follow a single instruction per inference call. In this work, we analyze whether LLMs also hold the capability to handle \textit{multiple} instructions simultaneously, denoted as Multi-Task Inference. For this purpose, we introduce the MTI Bench (Multi-Task Inference Benchmark), a comprehensive evaluation benchmark encompassing 5,000 instances across 25 tasks. Each task in the MTI Bench involves 2 to 3 sub-tasks. As expected, we first demonstrate that Multi-Task Inference reduces the total inference time by $\times 1.46$ times in average since it does not require multiple inference calls. Interestingly, contrary to the expectation that LLMs would perform better when tasks are divided, we find that state-of-the-art LLMs, such as Llama-2-Chat-70B and GPT-4, show up to 7.3\% and 12.4\% improved performance with Multi-Task Inference compared to Single-Task Inference on the MTI Bench. We release the MTI Bench dataset and our code at this [link](https://anonymous.4open.science/r/MTI-Bench-6F01).

Multi-Task Inference: Can Large Language Models Follow Multiple Instructions at Once?

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have brought significant changes to various domains, especially through LLM-driven autonomous agents. A representative scenario is in software development, where LLM agents demonstrate efficient collaboration, task division, and assurance of software quality, markedly reducing the need for manual involvement. However, these agents frequently perform a variety of tasks independently, without benefiting from past experiences, which leads to repeated mistakes and inefficient attempts in multi-step task execution. To this end, we introduce Experiential Co-Learning, a novel LLM-agent learning framework in which instructor and assistant agents gather shortcut-oriented experiences from their historical trajectories and use these past experiences for future task execution. The extensive experiments demonstrate that the framework enables agents to tackle unseen software-developing tasks more effectively. We anticipate that our insights will guide LLM agents towards enhanced autonomy and contribute to their evolutionary growth in cooperative learning. The code and data are available at https://github.com/OpenBMB/ChatDev.

Experiential Co-Learning of Software-Developing Agents

New intent discovery (NID) is an important problem for deploying practical dialogue systems, which trains intent classifiers on a semi-supervised corpus where unlabeled user utterances contain both known and novel intents. 
Most existing NID algorithms place hope on the sample similarity to cluster unlabeled corpus to known or new samples. Lacking supervision on new intents, we experimentally find the intent classifier fails to fully distinguish new intents since they tend to assemble into intertwined centers.
To address this problem, we propose a novel GeoID framework that learns geometry-aware representations to maximally separate all intents. 
Specifically, we are motivated by the recent findings on Neural Collapse (NC) in classification tasks to derive optimal intent center structure. 
Meanwhile, we devise a dual pseudo-labeling strategy based on optimal transport assignments and semi-supervised clustering, ensuring proper utterances-to-center arrangement.
Extensive results show that our GeoID method establishes a new state-of-the-art performance, achieving a +$3.49\%$ average accuracy improvement on three standardized benchmarking datasets. 
We also verify its usefulness in assisting large language models for improved in-context performance.

Learning Geometry-Aware Representations for New Intent Discovery

The recent success of large language models (LLMs) has attracted widespread interest to develop role-playing conversational agents personalized to the characteristics and styles of different speakers to enhance their abilities to perform both general and special purpose dialogue tasks. However, the ability to personalize the generated utterances to speakers, whether conducted by human or LLM, has not been well studied. To bridge this gap, our study introduces a novel evaluation challenge: speaker verification in agent-generated conversations, which aimed to verify whether two sets of utterances originate from the same speaker. To this end, we assemble a large dataset collection encompassing thousands of speakers and their utterances. We also develop and evaluate speaker verification models under experiment setups. We further utilize the speaker verification models to evaluate the personalization abilities of LLM-based role-playing models. Comprehensive experiments suggest that the current role-playing models fail in accurately mimicking speakers, primarily due to their inherent linguistic characteristics.

Speaker Verification in Agent-generated Conversations

Automatic evaluation methods for large language models (LLMs) are hindered by data contamination, leading to inflated assessments of their effectiveness. Existing strategies, which aim to detect contaminated texts, focus on quantifying contamination status instead of accurately gauging model performance. In this paper, we introduce KIEval, a Knowledge-grounded Interactive Evaluation framework, which incorporates an LLM-powered "interactor" role for the first time to accomplish a dynamic contamination-resilient evaluation. Starting with a question in a conventional LLM benchmark involving domain-specific knowledge, KIEval utilizes dynamically generated, multi-round, and knowledge-focused dialogues to determine whether a model's response is merely a recall of benchmark answers or demonstrates a deep comprehension to apply knowledge in more complex conversations. Extensive experiments on seven leading LLMs across five datasets validate KIEval's effectiveness and generalization. We also reveal that data contamination brings no contribution or even negative effect to models' real-world applicability and understanding, and existing contamination detection methods for LLMs can only identify contamination in pre-training but not during supervised fine-tuning.

KIEval: A Knowledge-grounded Interactive Evaluation Framework for Large Language Models

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have highlighted the need for robust, comprehensive, and challenging benchmarks. Yet, research on evaluating their Emotional Intelligence (EI) is considerably limited. Existing benchmarks have two major shortcomings: first, they mainly focus on emotion recognition, neglecting essential EI capabilities such as emotion management and thought facilitation through emotion understanding; second, they are primarily constructed from existing datasets, which include frequent patterns, explicit information, and annotation errors, leading to unreliable evaluation. We propose EmoBench, a benchmark that draws upon established psychological theories and proposes a comprehensive definition for machine EI, including Emotional Understanding and Emotional Application. EmoBench includes a set of 400 hand-crafted questions in English and Chinese, which are meticulously designed to require thorough reasoning and understanding. Our findings reveal a considerable gap between the EI of existing LLMs and the average human, highlighting a promising direction for future research. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/Sahandfer/EmoBench.

EmoBench: Evaluating the Emotional Intelligence of Large Language Models

Processing and reasoning over long contexts is crucial for many practical applications of Large Language Models (LLMs), such as document comprehension and agent construction. Despite recent strides in making LLMs process contexts with more than 100K tokens, there is currently a lack of a standardized benchmark to evaluate this long-context capability. Existing public benchmarks typically focus on contexts around 10K tokens, limiting the assessment and comparison of LLMs in processing longer contexts. In this paper, we propose \OURS, the first LLM benchmark featuring an average data length surpassing 100K tokens. \OURSSPACE comprises synthetic and realistic tasks spanning diverse domains in English and Chinese. The tasks in \OURSSPACE are designed to require an understanding of long dependencies in contexts and make simply retrieving a limited number of passages from contexts not sufficient for these tasks. Based on \OURS, we evaluate several state-of-the-art LLMs tailored for processing long contexts. The experimental results indicate that existing long-context LLMs still require significant advancements to process 100K+ contexts effectively. Furthermore, we present three intriguing analyses regarding the behavior of LLMs processing long context. Our code and data is released\footnote{\url{https://github.com/OpenBMB/InfiniteBench}}\footnote{\url{https://huggingface.co/datasets/xinrongzhang2022/InfiniteBench}}.

$\infty$Bench: Extending Long Context Evaluation Beyond 100K Tokens

Large Language Models (LLMs) have succeeded remarkably in understanding long-form contents. However, exploring their capability for generating long-form contents, such as reports and articles, has been relatively unexplored and inadequately assessed by existing benchmarks. The prevalent evaluation methods, which predominantly rely on crowdsourcing, are recognized for their labor-intensive nature and lack of efficiency, whereas automated metrics, such as the ROUGE score, demonstrate discordance with human judgment criteria. In this paper, we propose ProxyQA, an innovative framework dedicated to assessing long-text generation. ProxyQA comprises in-depth human-curated meta-questions spanning various domains, each accompanied by specific proxy-questions with pre-annotated answers. LLMs are tasked to generate extensive content in response to these meta-questions, by engaging an evaluator and incorporating the generated texts as contextual background, ProxyQA assesses the generated content's quality through the evaluator's accuracy in addressing the proxy-questions. We examine multiple LLMs, emphasizing ProxyQA's demanding nature as a high-quality assessment tool. Human evaluation demonstrates that the proxy-question method is notably self-consistent and aligns closely with human evaluative standards. The dataset and leaderboard is available at \url{https://proxy-qa.com}.

Premium content

Estimating Agreement by Chance for Sequence Annotation

Downloads

Next from ACL 2024

Marathon: A Race Through the Realm of Long Context with Large Language Models

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES