United States

Solving grid puzzles involves a significant amount of logical reasoning. Hence, it is a good domain to evaluate reasoning capability of a model which can then guide us to improve the reasoning ability of models. However, most existing works evaluate only the final predicted answer of a puzzle, without delving into an in-depth analysis of the LLMs&#39; reasoning chains (such as where they falter) or providing any finer metrics to evaluate them. Since LLMs may rely on simple heuristics or artifacts to predict the final answer, it is crucial to evaluate the generated reasoning chain beyond overall correctness measures, for accurately evaluating the reasoning abilities of LLMs. To this end, we first develop GridPuzzle, an evaluation dataset comprising of 274 grid-based puzzles with different complexities. Second, we propose a new error taxonomy derived from manual analysis of reasoning chains from LLMs including GPT-4, Claude-3, Gemini, Mistral, and Llama-2. Then, we develop a LLM-based framework for large-scale subjective evaluation (i.e., identifying errors) and an objective metric, PuzzleEval, to evaluate the correctness of reasoning chains. Evaluating reasoning chains from LLMs leads to several interesting findings. We further show that existing prompting methods used for enhancing models&#39; reasoning abilities do not improve performance on GridPuzzle. This highlights the importance of understanding fine-grained errors and presents a challenge for future research to enhance LLMs&#39; puzzle-solving abilities by developing methods that address these errors.

EMNLP 2024

Step-by-Step Reasoning to Solve Grid Puzzles: Where do LLMs Falter?

inference time scaling

reasoning

metrics

Solving grid puzzles involves a significant amount of logical reasoning. Hence, it is a good domain to evaluate reasoning capability of a model which can then guide us to improve the reasoning ability of models. However, most existing works evaluate only the final predicted answer of a puzzle, without delving into an in-depth analysis of the LLMs' reasoning chains (such as where they falter) or providing any finer metrics to evaluate them. Since LLMs may rely on simple heuristics or artifacts to predict the final answer, it is crucial to evaluate the generated reasoning chain beyond overall correctness measures, for accurately evaluating the reasoning abilities of LLMs. To this end, we first develop GridPuzzle, an evaluation dataset comprising of 274 grid-based puzzles with different complexities. Second, we propose a new error taxonomy derived from manual analysis of reasoning chains from LLMs including GPT-4, Claude-3, Gemini, Mistral, and Llama-2. Then, we develop a LLM-based framework for large-scale subjective evaluation (i.e., identifying errors) and an objective metric, PuzzleEval, to evaluate the correctness of reasoning chains. Evaluating reasoning chains from LLMs leads to several interesting findings. We further show that existing prompting methods used for enhancing models' reasoning abilities do not improve performance on GridPuzzle. This highlights the importance of understanding fine-grained errors and presents a challenge for future research to enhance LLMs' puzzle-solving abilities by developing methods that address these errors.

technical paper

## Welcome to EMNLP 2024! 
We are excited to welcome you to one of the most prominent conferences in the field of Natural Language Processing. This year, EMNLP 2024 is being held in a hybrid format,
offering both virtual and in-person participation in beautiful Miami. Due to a record-breaking number of submissions, we've expanded the total number of accepted papers to accommodate more cutting-edge research from around the globe.
### [Conference Handbook](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WPROgxjLAC96AJL7Ugy0tEnYm7dkrbHt/view?usp=sharing)

You are required to register for this event. **Please register [here](https://2024.emnlp.org/registration/).** The EMNLP 2024 event page on Underline will be open to public one week prior to the event.

Please register!

EMNLP 2024 will take place in Miami, Florida from Nov 12th to Nov 16th, 2024, at the Hyatt Regency Miami Hote and on Underline for remote participants.

This study investigates the presence of biases in large language models (LLMs), specifically focusing on how these models process and reflect inter-state conflict structures. Previous research has often lacked the standardized datasets necessary for a thorough and consistent evaluation of biases in this context. Without such datasets, it is challenging to accurately assess the impact of these biases on critical applications. To address this gap, we developed a diverse and high-quality corpus using a four-phase process. This process included generating texts based on international conflict-related keywords, enhancing emotional diversity to capture a broad spectrum of sentiments, validating the coherence and connections between texts, and conducting final quality assurance through human reviewers who are experts in natural language processing. Our analysis, conducted using this newly developed corpus, revealed subtle but significant negative biases in LLMs, particularly towards Eastern bloc countries such as Russia and China. These biases have the potential to influence decision-making processes in fields like national security and international relations, where accurate, unbiased information is crucial. The findings underscore the importance of evaluating and mitigating these biases to ensure the reliability and fairness of LLMs when applied in sensitive areas.

Fifty shapes of BLiMP: syntactic learning curves in language models are not uniform, but sometimes unruly

As NLP models become increasingly integral to decision-making processes, the need for explainability and interpretability has become paramount. In this work, we propose a framework that achieves the aforementioned by generating semantically edited inputs, known as counterfactual interventions, which change the model prediction, thus providing a form of counterfactual explanations for the model. We frame the search for optimal counterfactual interventions as a graph assignment problem and employ a GNN to solve it, thus achieving high efficiency. We test our framework on two NLP tasks - binary sentiment classification and topic classification - and show that the generated edits are contrastive, fluent and minimal, while the whole process remains significantly faster than other state-of-the-art counterfactual editors.

Optimal and efficient text counterfactuals using Graph Neural Networks

Influence of Context on Token-Expert Assignments in Mixture-of-Experts Language Models

Routing in Sparsely-gated Language Models responds to Context

Sentence embeddings from transformer models encode much linguistic information in a fixed-length vector. We investigate whether structural information -- specifically, information about chunks and their structural and semantic properties -- can be detected in these representations. We use a dataset consisting of sentences with known chunk structure, and two linguistic intelligence datasets, whose solution relies on detecting chunks and their grammatical number, and respectively, their semantic roles. Through an approach involving indirect supervision, and through analyses of the performance on the tasks and of the internal representations built during learning, we show that information about chunks and their properties can be obtained from sentence embeddings.

Are there identifiable structural parts in the sentence embedding whole?

Large language models memorize portions of their training data verbatim. Our findings indicate that models exhibit higher memorization rates both early on and at the very end of their training, with the lowest rates occurring midway through the process. This phenomenon can be attributed to the models retaining most of the examples memorized early on, while forgetting many more examples as training progresses. Interestingly, these forgotten examples are sometimes re-memorized later on, often undergoing cycles of forgetting and re-memorization. Notably, examples memorized early in training are more likely to remain consistently retained, suggesting that they become more firmly ’crystallized’ in the model’s representation. Based on these insights, we tentatively recommend placing data that is more likely to be sensitive in the middle stages of the training process.

Learning, Forgetting, Remembering: Insights From Tracking LLM Memorization During Training

For induction heads to copy forward information successfully, heads in earlier layers must first load previous token information into every hidden state, a process Olsson et al. (2022) call "key shifting". While this information is hypothesized to exist, there have been few attempts to explicitly locate it in models. In this work, we use linear probes to identify the subspaces responsible for storing previous token information in Llama-2-7b and Llama-3-8b. We show that these subspaces are causally implicated in induction by using them to "edit" previous token information and trigger random token copying in new contexts.

Inducing Induction in Llama via Linear Probe Interventions

Whether LLMs can estimate their hallucination risk based on internal states before response generation.

LLM Internal States Reveal Hallucination Risk Faced With a Query

The surge of state-of-the-art transformer-based models has undoubtedly pushed the limits of NLP model performance, excelling in a variety of tasks. We cast the spotlight on the underexplored task of Natural Language Inference (NLI), since models trained on popular well-suited datasets are susceptible to adversarial attacks, allowing subtle input interventions to mislead the model. In this work, we validate the usage of natural language explanation as a model-agnostic defence strategy through extensive experimentation: only by fine-tuning a classifier on the explanation rather than premise-hypothesis inputs, robustness under various adversarial attacks is achieved in comparison to explanation-free baselines. Moreover, since there is no standard strategy for testing the semantic validity of the generated explanations, we research the correlation of widely used language generation metrics with human perception, in order for them to serve as a proxy towards robust NLI models. Our approach is resource-efficient and reproducible without significant computational limitations.

Enhancing adversarial robustness in Natural Language Inference using explanations

A key topic in AI and NLP today is autonomous agents, typically powered by large language models (LLMs), which can follow language instructions to complete complex tasks in real or simulated environments. While the concept of AI agents has existed since the beginning of AI, the recent shift lies in their ability to use language as a vehicle for both thought and communication, a trait previously unique to humans. This expands their ability to tackle diverse problems autonomously and sets them apart from earlier AI agents. To reflect this, the term "language agents" has been suggested, emphasizing language as their defining feature. Language played a crucial role in human cognitive evolution, and AI might be following 
a similar path. However, there has been little systematic discussion on the definition, theoretical foundations, risks, and future directions of language agents. This tutorial aims to fill that gap by providing a comprehensive exploration of language agents, linking insights from both modern and classic AI research. [Read more](https://language-agent-tutorial.github.io/)

Language Agents: Foundations, Prospects, and Risks

Explanation constitutes an archetypal feature of human rationality, underpinning learning and generalisation, and representing one of the media supporting scientific discovery and communication.
Due to the importance of explanations in human reasoning, an increasing amount of research in Natural Language Inference (NLI) has started reconsidering the role that explanations play in learning and inference, attempting to build explanation-based NLI models that can effectively encode and use natural language explanations on downstream tasks.
Research in explanation-based NLI, however, presents specific challenges and opportunities, as explanatory reasoning reflects aspects of both material and formal inference, making it a particularly rich setting to model and deliver complex reasoning.
In this tutorial, we provide a comprehensive introduction to the field of explanation-based NLI, grounding this discussion on the epistemological-linguistic foundations of explanations, systematically describing the main architectural trends and evaluation methodologies that can be used to build systems capable of explanatory reasoning. [Read more](https://sites.google.com/view/reasoning-with-explanations)

Step-by-Step Reasoning to Solve Grid Puzzles: Where do LLMs Falter?

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2024

Fifty shapes of BLiMP: syntactic learning curves in language models are not uniform, but sometimes unruly

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES