United States

This paper introduces a novel, entity-aware metric, termed as Radiological Report (Text) Evaluation (RaTEScore), to assess the quality of medical reports generated by AI models. RaTEScore emphasizes crucial medical entities such as diagnostic outcomes and anatomical details, and is robust against complex medical synonyms and sensitive to negation expressions. Technically, we developed a comprehensive medical NER dataset, RaTE-NER, and trained an NER model specifically for this purpose. This model enables the decomposition of complex radiological reports into constituent medical entities. The metric itself is derived by comparing the similarity of entity embeddings, obtained from a language model, based on their types and relevance to clinical significance. Our evaluations demonstrate that RaTEScore aligns more closely with human preference than existing metrics, validated both on established public benchmarks and our newly proposed RaTE-Eval benchmark.

EMNLP 2024

RaTEScore: A Metric for Entity-Aware Radiology Text Similarity

hallucination measurement

faithfulness

automatic evaluation

poster

## 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.

Automating the measurement of hallucinations in LLM generated responses is a challenging task as it requires careful investigation of each factual claim in a response. In this paper, we introduce HalluMeasure, a new LLM-based hallucination detection mechanism that decomposes an LLM response into atomic claims, and evaluates each atomic claim against the provided reference context. The model uses a step-by-step reasoning process called Chain-of-Thought and can identify 3 major categories of hallucinations (e.g., contradiction) as well as 10 more specific subtypes (e.g., overgeneralization) which help to identify reasons behind the hallucination errors. Specifically, we explore four different configurations for HalluMeasure's classifier: with and without CoT prompting, and using a single classifier call to classify all claims versus separate calls for each claim. The best-performing configuration (with CoT and separate calls for each claim) demonstrates significant improvements in detecting hallucinations, achieving a 10-point increase in F1 score on our TechNewsSumm dataset, and a 3-point increase in AUC ROC on the SummEval dataset, compared to three baseline models (RefChecker, AlignScore, and Vectara HHEM). We further show reasonable accuracy on detecting 10 novel error subtypes of hallucinations (where even humans struggle in classification) derived from linguistic analysis of the errors made by the LLMs.

HalluMeasure: Fine-grained Hallucination Measurement Using Chain-of-Thought Reasoning

Evaluating the degree of reproduction of copyright-protected content by language models (LMs) is of significant interest to the AI and legal communities. Although both literal and non-literal similarities are considered by courts when assessing the degree of reproduction, prior research has focused only on literal similarities. To bridge this gap, we introduce CopyBench, a benchmark designed to measure both literal and non-literal copying in LM generations. Using copyrighted fiction books as text sources, we provide automatic evaluation protocols to assess literal and non-literal copying, balanced against the model utility in terms of the ability to recall facts from the copyrighted works and generate fluent completions. We find that, although literal copying is relatively rare, two types of non-literal copying---event copying and character copying---occur even in models as small as 7B parameters. Larger models demonstrate significantly more copying, with literal copying rates increasing from 0.2\% to 10.5\% and non-literal copying from 2.3\% to 5.9\% when comparing Llama3-8B and 70B models, respectively. We further evaluate the effectiveness of current strategies for mitigating copying and show that (1) training-time alignment can reduce literal copying but may increase non-literal copying, and (2) current inference-time mitigation methods primarily reduce literal but not non-literal copying.

CopyBench: Measuring Literal and Non-Literal Reproduction of Copyright-Protected Text in Language Model Generation

Learning a model of a stochastic setting often involves learning both general structure rules and specific properties of the instance. This paper investigates the interplay between learning the general and the specific in various learning methods, with emphasis on sample efficiency. We design a framework called LEVERWORLDS, which allows the generation of simple physics-inspired worlds that follow a similar generative process with different distributions, and their instances can be expressed in natural language. These worlds allow for controlled experiments to assess the sample complexity of different learning methods. We experiment with classic learning algorithms as well as Transformer language models, both with fine-tuning and In-Context Learning (ICL). Our general finding is that (1) Transformers generally succeed in the task; but (2) they are considerably less sample efficient than classic methods that make stronger assumptions about the structure, such as Maximum Likelihood Estimation and Logistic Regression. This finding is in tension with the recent tendency to use Transformers as general-purpose estimators. We propose an approach that leverages the ICL capabilities of contemporary language models to apply simple algorithms for this type of data. Our experiments show that models currently struggle with the task but show promising potential.

Exploring the Learning Capabilities of Language Models using LEVERWORLDS

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is a popular strategy for aligning large language models (LLMs) with desired behaviors. Reward modeling is a crucial step in RLHF. However, collecting paired preference data for training reward models is often costly and time-consuming, especially for domain-specific preferences requiring expert annotation. To address this challenge, we propose the **Do**main knowled**ge** merged **R**eward **M**odel (**DogeRM**), a novel framework that integrates domain-specific knowledge into a general reward model by model merging. The experiments demonstrate that DogeRM enhances performance across different benchmarks and provide a detailed analysis showcasing the effects of model merging, showing the great potential of facilitating model alignment.

DogeRM: Equipping Reward Models with Domain Knowledge through Model Merging

The global shortage of healthcare workers has demanded the development of smart healthcare assistants, which can help monitor and alert healthcare workers when necessary. We examine the healthcare knowledge of existing Large Vision Language Models (LVLMs) via the Visual Question Answering (VQA) task in hospital settings through expert annotated open-ended questions. We introduce the Emergency Room Visual Question Answering (ERVQA) dataset, consisting of <image, question, answer> triplets covering diverse emergency room scenarios, a seminal benchmark for LVLMs. By developing a detailed error taxonomy and analyzing answer trends, we reveal the nuanced nature of the task. We benchmark state-of-the-art open-source and closed LVLMs using traditional and adapted VQA metrics: Entailment Score and CLIPScore Confidence. Analyzing errors across models, we infer trends based on properties like decoder type, model size, and in-context examples. Our findings suggest the ERVQA dataset presents a highly complex task, highlighting the need for specialized, domain-specific solutions.

ERVQA: A Dataset to Benchmark the Readiness of Large Vision Language Models in Hospital Environments

Scientific reasoning poses an excessive challenge for even the most advanced Large Language Models (LLMs). To make this task more practical and solvable for LLMs, we introduce a new task setting named tool-augmented scientific reasoning. This setting supplements LLMs with scalable toolsets, and shifts the focus from pursuing an omniscient problem solver to a proficient tool-user. To facilitate the research of such setting, we construct a tool-augmented training corpus named MathFunc which encompasses over 30,000 samples and roughly 6,000 tools. Building on MathFunc, we develop SciAgent to retrieve, understand and, if necessary, use tools for scientific problem solving. Additionally, we craft a benchmark, SciToolBench, spanning five scientific domains to evaluate LLMs' abilities with tool assistance. Extensive experiments on SciToolBench confirm the effectiveness of SciAgent. Notably, SciAgent-Llama3-8B surpasses other LLMs with the comparable size by more than 8.0% in absolute accuracy. Furthermore, SciAgent-DeepMath-7B shows much superior performance than ChatGPT.

SciAgent: Tool-augmented Language Models for Scientific Reasoning

Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI assistants driven by these models are experiencing exponential growth in usage among both expert and amateur users. In this work, we focus on evaluating the reliability of current LLMs as science communicators. Unlike existing benchmarks, our approach emphasizes assessing these models on scientific question-answering tasks that require a nuanced understanding and awareness of answerability. We introduce a novel dataset, SCiPS-QA, comprising 742 Yes/No queries embedded in complex scientific concepts, along with a benchmarking suite that evaluates LLMs for correctness and consistency across various criteria. We benchmark three proprietary LLMs from the OpenAI GPT family and 13 open-access LLMs from the Meta Llama-2, Llama-3, and Mistral families. While most open-access models significantly underperform compared to GPT-4 Turbo, our experiments identify Llama-3-70B as a strong competitor, often surpassing GPT-4 Turbo in various evaluation aspects. We also find that even the GPT models exhibit a general incompetence in reliably verifying LLM responses. Moreover, we observe an alarming trend where human evaluators are deceived by incorrect responses from GPT-4 Turbo.

Can LLMs replace Neil deGrasse Tyson? Evaluating the Reliability of LLMs as Science Communicators

Answer verification identifies correct solutions among candidates generated by large language models (LLMs). Current approaches typically train verifier models by labeling solutions as correct or incorrect based solely on whether the final answer matches the gold answer. However, this approach neglects any flawed rationale in the solution yielding the correct answer, undermining the verifier's ability to distinguish between sound and flawed rationales. We empirically show that in StrategyQA, only 19% of LLM-generated solutions with correct answers have valid rationales, thus leading to an unreliable verifier. Furthermore, we demonstrate that training a verifier on valid rationales significantly improves its ability to distinguish valid and flawed rationale. To make a better verifier without extra human supervision, we introduce REPS (Rationale Enhancement through Pairwise Selection), a method for selecting valid rationales from candidates by iteratively applying pairwise self-evaluation using the same LLM that generates the solutions. Verifiers trained on solutions selected by REPS outperform those trained using conventional training methods on three reasoning benchmarks (ARC-Challenge, DROP, and StrategyQA). Our results suggest that training reliable verifiers requires ensuring the validity of rationales in addition to the correctness of the final answers, which would be critical for models assisting humans in solving complex reasoning tasks.

Rationale-Aware Answer Verification by Pairwise Self-Evaluation

Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) have achieved remarkable performance on diverse NLP tasks through pre-training and fine-tuning. However, fine-tuning the model with a large number of parameters on limited downstream datasets often leads to vulnerability to adversarial attacks, causing overfitting of the model on standard datasets. To address these issues, we propose IM-BERT from the perspective of a dynamic system by conceptualizing a layer of BERT as a solution of Ordinary Differential Equations (ODEs). Under the situation of initial value perturbation, we analyze the numerical stability of two main numerical ODE solvers: *the explicit and implicit Euler approaches.* Based on these analyses, we introduce a numerically robust IM-connection incorporating BERT’s layers. This strategy enhances the robustness of PLMs against adversarial attacks, even in low-resource scenarios, without introducing additional parameters or adversarial training strategies. Experimental results on the adversarial GLUE (AdvGLUE) dataset validate the robustness of IM-BERT under various conditions. Compared to the original BERT, IM-BERT exhibits a performance improvement of approximately 8.3%p on the AdvGLUE dataset. Furthermore, in low-resource scenarios, IM-BERT outperforms BERT by achieving 5.9%p higher accuracy.

IM-BERT: Enhancing Robustness of BERT through the Implicit Euler Method

Human cognition exhibits systematic compositionality, the algebraic ability to generate infinite novel combinations from finite learned components, which is the key to understanding and reasoning about complex logic. In this work, we investigate the compositionality of large language models (LLMs) in mathematical reasoning. Specifically, we construct a new dataset \textsc{MathTrap} by introducing carefully designed logical traps into the problem descriptions of MATH and GSM8K. Since problems with logical flaws are quite rare in the real world, these represent ``unseen'' cases to LLMs. Solving these requires the models to systematically compose (1) the mathematical knowledge involved in the original problems with (2) knowledge related to the introduced traps. Our experiments show that while LLMs possess both components of requisite knowledge, they do not \textbf{spontaneously} combine them to handle these novel cases. We explore several methods to mitigate this deficiency, such as natural language prompts, few-shot demonstrations, and fine-tuning. We find that LLMs' performance can be improved through the above external intervention. Overall, systematic compositionality remains an open challenge for large language models.

Premium content

RaTEScore: A Metric for Entity-Aware Radiology Text Similarity

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2024

HalluMeasure: Fine-grained Hallucination Measurement Using Chain-of-Thought Reasoning

Stay up to date with the latest Underline news!

PRESENTATIONS

CONFERENCES

COMPANY

RESOURCES