Recent developments in natural language generation (NLG) using neural language models have brought us closer than ever to the goal of building AI-powered creative writing tools. However, most prior work on human-AI collaboration in the creative writing domain has evaluated new systems with amateur writers, typically in contrived user studies of limited scope. In this work, we commissioned 13 professional, published writers from a diverse set of creative writing backgrounds to craft stories using Wordcraft, a text editor with built-in AI-powered writing assistance tools. Using interviews and participant journals, we discuss the potential of NLG to have significant impact in the creative writing domain--especially with respect to brainstorming, generation of story details, world-building, and research assistance. Experienced writers, more so than amateurs, typically have well-developed systems and methodologies for writing, as well as distinctive voices and target audiences. Our work highlights the challenges in building for these writers; NLG technologies struggle to preserve style and authorial voice, and they lack deep understanding of story contents. In order for AI-powered writing assistants to realize their full potential, it is essential that they take into account the diverse goals and expertise of human writers.

我们提出了一项探索性定性研究，以了解作家如何与下一页建议相互作用。尽管对建议系统对写作的影响进行了一些定量研究，但几乎没有定性的工作来理解作家如何与建议系统互动及其如何影响他们的写作过程 - 特别是针对非本地但英国作家的。我们进行了一项研究，要求业余作家分别写两部电影评论，一本没有建议。我们发现作家以各种复杂的方式与下一页建议互动 - 作家能够抽象建议的多个部分并将其纳入他们的写作中 - 即使他们不同意整个建议。建议系统对写作过程也有各种影响 - 以独特的方式为写作过程的不同方面做出了影响。我们提出了一种用于与GPT-2写作的作家 - 探索互动模型，用于电影评论写作任务，然后是该模型可用于未来研究的方式，并概述了研究和设计的机会。

大型语言模型，例如OpenAI的法典和DeepMind的字母，可以生成代码来解决以自然语言表达的各种问题。这项技术已经在至少一项广泛使用的编程编辑器扩展程序中进行了商业化：Github Copilot。在本文中，我们探讨了具有大型语言模型（LLM辅助编程）的编程与程序员协助的先前概念化相似，并且与众不同。我们借鉴了公开可用的经验报告，有关LLM辅助编程以及先前的可用性和设计研究。我们发现，尽管LLM辅助编程通过搜索和重用分享了一些编译，配对编程和编程的属性，但技术可能性和实践经验都存在根本差异。因此，应该将LLM辅助编程视为具有自己独特的属性和挑战的新方法。最后，我们借鉴了用户研究的观察结果，在该观察中，非专家最终用户程序员使用LLM辅助工具来求解电子表格中的数据任务。我们讨论可能出现的问题，并在将大型语言模型应用于最终用户编程时，尤其是对于几乎没有编程专业知识的用户。

Many real-world applications of language models (LMs), such as code autocomplete and writing assistance, involve human-LM interaction, but the main LM benchmarks are non-interactive, where a system produces output without human intervention. To evaluate human-LM interaction, we develop a framework, Human-AI Language-based Interaction Evaluation (H-LINE), that expands non-interactive evaluation along three dimensions, capturing (i) the interactive process, not only the final output; (ii) the first-person subjective experience, not just a third-party assessment; and (iii) notions of preference beyond quality. We then design five tasks ranging from goal-oriented to open-ended to capture different forms of interaction. On four state-of-the-art LMs (three variants of OpenAI's GPT-3 and AI21's J1-Jumbo), we find that non-interactive performance does not always result in better human-LM interaction and that first-person and third-party metrics can diverge, suggesting the importance of examining the nuances of human-LM interaction.

神经语言模型有可能支持人类写作。但是，关于其整合和对写作和产出的影响仍然存在问题。为了解决这个问题，我们设计并比较了两个用于写作的用户界面与移动设备上的AI，这些用户界面操纵主动性和控制级别：1）使用连续生成的文本编写，AI添加了逐字文字和用户转向。 2）编写建议，AI建议短语和用户从列表中选择。在监督的在线研究（n = 18）中，参与者使用了这些原型和无AI的基线。我们收集了触摸互动，关于灵感和作者的评分以及访谈数据。有了AI的建议，人们的写作不那么积极，但觉得他们是作者。连续生成的文本减少了这种感知的作者身份，但编辑行为增加了。在这两种设计中，AI都会增加文本长度，并被认为会影响措辞。我们的发现为UI设计决策对用户体验和共同创造系统的产出的影响增加了新的经验证据。

在线众包平台使对算法输出进行评估变得容易，并提出诸如“哪个图像更好，A或B？”之类的问题的调查，在视觉和图形研究论文中的这些“用户研究”的扩散导致了增加匆忙进行的研究充其量是草率且无知的，并且可能有害和误导。我们认为，在计算机视觉和图形论文中的用户研究的设计和报告需要更多关注。为了提高从业者的知识并提高用户研究的可信度和可复制性，我们提供了用户体验研究（UXR），人类计算机互动（HCI）和相关领域的方法论的概述。我们讨论了目前在计算机视觉和图形研究中未利用的基础用户研究方法（例如，需要调查），但可以为研究项目提供宝贵的指导。我们为有兴趣探索其他UXR方法的读者提供了进一步的指导。最后，我们描述了研究界的更广泛的开放问题和建议。我们鼓励作者和审稿人都认识到，并非每项研究贡献都需要用户研究，而且根本没有研究比不小心进行的研究更好。

We propose the Detailed Outline Control (DOC) framework for improving long-range plot coherence when automatically generating several-thousand-word-long stories. DOC consists of two complementary components: a detailed outliner and a detailed controller. The detailed outliner creates a more detailed, hierarchically structured outline, shifting creative burden from the main drafting procedure to the planning stage. The detailed controller ensures the more detailed outline is still respected during generation by controlling story passages to align with outline details. In human evaluations of automatically generated stories, DOC substantially outperforms a strong Re3 baseline (Yang et al., 2022) on plot coherence (22.5% absolute gain), outline relevance (28.2%), and interestingness (20.7%). Humans also judged DOC to be much more controllable in an interactive generation setting.

This research revisits the classic Turing test and compares recent large language models such as ChatGPT for their abilities to reproduce human-level comprehension and compelling text generation. Two task challenges -- summarization, and question answering -- prompt ChatGPT to produce original content (98-99%) from a single text entry and also sequential questions originally posed by Turing in 1950. The question of a machine fooling a human judge recedes in this work relative to the question of "how would one prove it?" The original contribution of the work presents a metric and simple grammatical set for understanding the writing mechanics of chatbots in evaluating their readability and statistical clarity, engagement, delivery, and overall quality. While Turing's original prose scores at least 14% below the machine-generated output, the question of whether an algorithm displays hints of Turing's truly original thoughts (the "Lovelace 2.0" test) remains unanswered and potentially unanswerable for now.

Developing safe and useful general-purpose AI systems will require us to make progress on scalable oversight: the problem of supervising systems that potentially outperform us on most skills relevant to the task at hand. Empirical work on this problem is not straightforward, since we do not yet have systems that broadly exceed our abilities. This paper discusses one of the major ways we think about this problem, with a focus on how to turn it into one that can be productively studied empirically. We first present an experimental design centered on choosing tasks for which human specialists succeed but unaided humans and current general AI systems fail. We then present a proof-of-concept experiment following meant to demonstrate a key feature of this experimental design and show its viability with two question-answering tasks: MMLU and time-limited QuALITY. On these tasks, we find that human participants who interact with an unreliable large-language-model dialog assistant through chat -- a trivial baseline strategy for scalable oversight -- substantially outperform both the model alone and their own unaided performance. These results are an encouraging sign that scalable oversight will be tractable to study with present models and bolster recent findings that large language models can productively assist humans with difficult tasks.

我们介绍了Sparrow，这是一个寻求信息的对话代理，与提示的语言模型基线相比，训练有素，更有帮助，正确和无害。我们使用从人类反馈中的强化学习来培训我们的模型，以帮助人类评估者判断代理人的行为。首先，为了使我们的代理人更有帮助和无害，我们将良好对话的要求分解为代理人应遵循的自然语言规则，并分别向评估者询问每个规则。我们证明，这种崩溃使我们能够收集对代理行为的更多针对性的人类判断，并允许更有效的规则条件奖励模型。其次，我们的代理商在收集对模型声明的偏好判决时提供了支持事实主张的来源的证据。对于事实问题，麻雀提供的证据支持了78％的时间。比基线比基线更享受麻雀，同时对人类的对抗性探测更具弹性，在探测时只有8％的时间违反了我们的规则。最后，我们进行了广泛的分析，表明尽管我们的模型学会遵守我们的规则，但它可以表现出分布偏见。

Incivility remains a major challenge for online discussion platforms, to such an extent that even conversations between well-intentioned users can often derail into uncivil behavior. Traditionally, platforms have relied on moderators to -- with or without algorithmic assistance -- take corrective actions such as removing comments or banning users. In this work we propose a complementary paradigm that directly empowers users by proactively enhancing their awareness about existing tension in the conversation they are engaging in and actively guides them as they are drafting their replies to avoid further escalation. As a proof of concept for this paradigm, we design an algorithmic tool that provides such proactive information directly to users, and conduct a user study in a popular discussion platform. Through a mixed methods approach combining surveys with a randomized controlled experiment, we uncover qualitative and quantitative insights regarding how the participants utilize and react to this information. Most participants report finding this proactive paradigm valuable, noting that it helps them to identify tension that they may have otherwise missed and prompts them to further reflect on their own replies and to revise them. These effects are corroborated by a comparison of how the participants draft their reply when our tool warns them that their conversation is at risk of derailing into uncivil behavior versus in a control condition where the tool is disabled. These preliminary findings highlight the potential of this user-centered paradigm and point to concrete directions for future implementations.

Controlled automated story generation seeks to generate natural language stories satisfying constraints from natural language critiques or preferences. Existing methods to control for story preference utilize prompt engineering which is labor intensive and often inconsistent. They may also use logit-manipulation methods which require annotated datasets to exist for the desired attributes. To address these issues, we first train a contrastive bi-encoder model to align stories with corresponding human critiques, named CARP, building a general purpose preference model. This is subsequently used as a reward function to fine-tune a generative language model via reinforcement learning. However, simply fine-tuning a generative language model with a contrastive reward model does not always reliably result in a story generation system capable of generating stories that meet user preferences. To increase story generation robustness we further fine-tune the contrastive reward model using a prompt-learning technique. A human participant study is then conducted comparing generations from our full system, ablations, and two baselines. We show that the full fine-tuning pipeline results in a story generator preferred over a LLM 20x as large as well as logit-based methods. This motivates the use of contrastive learning for general purpose human preference modeling.

数据对于机器学习（ML）模型的开发和评估至关重要。但是，在部署所得模型时，使用有问题或不适当的数据集可能会造成危害。为了通过对数据集进行更故意的反思和创建过程的透明度来鼓励负责任的练习，研究人员和从业人员已开始倡导增加数据文档，并提出了几个数据文档框架。但是，几乎没有研究这些数据文档框架是否满足创建和消费数据集的ML从业者的需求。为了解决这一差距，我们着手了解ML从业人员的数据文档感知，需求，挑战和Desiderata，目的是推导设计要求，以便为将来的数据文档框架提供信息。我们对一家大型国际技术公司的14名ML从业者进行了一系列半结构化访谈。我们让他们回答从数据集的数据表中提取的问题列表（Gebru，2021）。我们的发现表明，目前的数据文档方法在很大程度上是临时的，而且本质上是近视的。参与者表达了对数据文档框架的需求，可以适应其上下文，并将其集成到现有的工具和工作流程中，并尽可能自动化。尽管事实上，数据文档框架通常是从负责人的AI的角度出发的，但参与者并未在他们被要求回答的问题与负责的AI含义之间建立联系。此外，参与者通常会在数据集消费者的需求中优先考虑，并提供了不熟悉其数据集可能需要知道的信息。基于这些发现，我们为将来的数据文档框架得出了七个设计要求。

随着人工智能系统变得越来越强大和普遍，人们对机器的道德或缺乏道德的关注变得越来越关注。然而，向机器讲授道德是一项艰巨的任务，因为道德仍然是人类中最激烈的争论问题之一，更不用说AI了。但是，部署到数百万用户的现有AI系统已经在做出充满道德影响的决策，这构成了一个看似不可能的挑战：教学机器的道德意义，而人类继续努力努力。为了探索这一挑战，我们介绍了Delphi，这是一个基于深层神经网络的实验框架，直接训练了描述性道德判断，例如，“帮助朋友”通常是不错的，而“帮助朋友传播假新闻”不是。经验结果提供了对机器伦理的承诺和局限性的新见解。面对新的道德情况，德尔菲（Delphi）表现出强大的概括能力，而现成的神经网络模型表现出明显差的判断，包括不公正的偏见，证实了对明确教学机器的道德意义的必要性。然而，德尔菲并不完美，表现出对普遍性偏见和不一致的敏感性。尽管如此，我们还是展示了不完美的Delphi的积极用例，包括在其他不完美的AI系统中将其用作组件模型。重要的是，我们根据著名的道德理论来解释Delphi的运营化，这使我们提出了重要的未来研究问题。

语言模型可以根据给定的文化背景产生有害和偏置的输出并表现出不良行为。我们提出了一种将语言模型适应社会（PALM）与值目标数据集的过程，以通过在反映预定的一组目标值集合的数据集上进行制备和微调来显着地改变模型行为的迭代过程。我们使用三个指标评估我们的进程：具有人类评估的定量指标，将输出遵守目标值，毒性评分对产出;和定性度量分析与给定社会类别相关的最常见的单词。通过每次迭代，我们根据来自评估的观察到的缺点添加其他培训数据集示例。与基线和控制模型相比，PALMS在所有指标上显着更好地为广泛的GPT-3语言模型尺寸进行了基线和控制模型，而不会影响能力完整性。我们发现PALMS的有效性随模型规模而增加。我们表明，显着调整语言模型行为与小型手腕策划数据集是可行的。

Drawing from the resources of psychoanalysis and critical media studies, in this paper we develop an analysis of Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated subjects. We argue the intentional fictional projection of subjectivity onto LLMs can yield an alternate frame through which AI behaviour, including its productions of bias and harm, can be analysed. First, we introduce language models, discuss their significance and risks, and outline our case for interpreting model design and outputs with support from psychoanalytic concepts. We trace a brief history of language models, culminating with the releases, in 2022, of systems that realise state-of-the-art natural language processing performance. We engage with one such system, OpenAI's InstructGPT, as a case study, detailing the layers of its construction and conducting exploratory and semi-structured interviews with chatbots. These interviews probe the model's moral imperatives to be helpful, truthful and harmless by design. The model acts, we argue, as the condensation of often competing social desires, articulated through the internet and harvested into training data, which must then be regulated and repressed. This foundational structure can however be redirected via prompting, so that the model comes to identify with, and transfer, its commitments to the immediate human subject before it. In turn, these automated productions of language can lead to the human subject projecting agency upon the model, effecting occasionally further forms of countertransference. We conclude that critical media methods and psychoanalytic theory together offer a productive frame for grasping the powerful new capacities of AI-driven language systems.

This paper provides an introductory survey to GPT-3. We cover some of the historical development behind this technology, some of the key features of GPT-3, and discuss the machine learning model and the datasets used. We survey both academic and commercial efforts applying GPT-3 in diverse domains such as developing conversational AI chatbots, software development, creative work, domain knowledge, and business productivity. We discuss some of the challenges that GPT-3 faces such as the problems of training complexity, bias, and hallucination/incorrect answers. We also discuss the future research opportunities in this area.

我们提出了一个文本编辑器，以帮助用户计划，结构并反思其写作过程。它使用自动文本摘要提供了不断更新的段落摘要作为边缘注释。摘要级别范围从全文到选定的（中央）句子，一直到关键字的集合。为了了解用户在写作过程中如何与该系统进行交互，我们进行了两项用户研究（n = 4和n = 8），人们在其中写了有关给定主题和文章的分析文章。作为关键发现，这些摘要使用户对他们的写作有了外部视角，并帮助他们修改了草稿段落的内容和范围。人们进一步使用该工具快速获得文本概述，并制定了整合自动摘要中见解的策略。从更广泛的角度来看，这项工作探索并突出了为作家设计AI工具的价值，其自然语言处理（NLP）功能超出了直接文本生成和更正。

最近的神经生成系统已经证明了程序性生成游戏内容，图像，故事等的潜力。但是，大多数神经生成算法是“不受控制的”，因为用户在最初的及时规范之外的创意决策中几乎没有发言权。共同创造性的混合定位系统需要以用户为中心的影响算法，尤其是当用户不太可能拥有机器学习专业知识时。共同创造系统的关键是能够从用户到代理以及从代理到用户传达想法和意图的能力。共同创造的AI中的关键问题包括：用户如何表达自己的创造意图？ Creative AI系统如何传达他们的信念，解释他们的举动或指示用户代表他们采取行动？ Creative AI系统何时应该采取主动？此类问题的答案以及更多的答案将使我们能够开发出更好的共同创造系统，从而使人类更有能力表达自己的创造意图。我们介绍了Creative-Wand，这是一个可定制的框架，用于调查共同创造的混合发电生成。 Creative-Wand可以将生成模型和人类代理通信渠道的插入式注射到基于聊天的接口中。它提供了许多维度，在共同创造过程中，AI发生器和人类可以进行交流。我们通过使用该框架来研究共同创造性通信全球广播的一个维度与本地创意意图通过讲故事的上下文来说明创意范围的框架。

最近已被证明大型语言模型在各种任务集中获得合理的零射普通化（Brown等，2020）。它已经假设这是语言模型的隐式多任务学习的结果，在语言模型中的预押（Radford等，2019）。可以通过明确的多任务学习直接引起零拍常规化？为了以缩放测试这个问题，我们开发一个系统，以便轻松地将任何自然语言任务映射到人类可读的提示表单中。我们转换一组大量的监督数据集，每个数据集都有多个提示，具有不同的措辞。这些提示的数据集允许基准测试模型执行完全看不见的任务的能力。我们介绍了一个普拉克尔编码器 - 解码器模型（Raffel等，2020; Lester等，2021），覆盖各种任务。该模型在多个标准数据集中达到强大的零点性能，通常优于其尺寸的型号超过16倍。此外，我们的方法对来自Big-替补基准测试的任务子集具有强烈性能，优于其尺寸的6倍。所有提示和培训的型号都可以在https://github.com/ bigscience-workshop / protectsource / httpsource / https：//huggingface.co/bigscience/t0pp。