This paper presents the Crowd Score, a novel method to assess the funniness of jokes using large language models (LLMs) as AI judges. Our method relies on inducing different personalities into the LLM and aggregating the votes of the AI judges into a single score to rate jokes. We validate the votes using an auditing technique that checks if the explanation for a particular vote is reasonable using the LLM. We tested our methodology on 52 jokes in a crowd of four AI voters with different humour types: affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive and self-defeating. Our results show that few-shot prompting leads to better results than zero-shot for the voting question. Personality induction showed that aggressive and self-defeating voters are significantly more inclined to find more jokes funny of a set of aggressive/self-defeating jokes than the affiliative and self-enhancing voters. The Crowd Score follows the same trend as human judges by assigning higher scores to jokes that are also considered funnier by human judges. We believe that our methodology could be applied to other creative domains such as story, poetry, slogans, etc. It could both help the adoption of a flexible and accurate standard approach to compare different work in the CC community under a common metric and by minimizing human participation in assessing creative artefacts, it could accelerate the prototyping of creative artefacts and reduce the cost of hiring human participants to rate creative artefacts.

Large language models that are capable of zero or few-shot prompting approaches have given rise to the new research area of prompt engineering. Recent advances showed that for example Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompts can improve arithmetic or common sense tasks significantly. We explore how such approaches fair with legal reasoning tasks and take the COLIEE entailment task based on the Japanese Bar exam for testing zero-shot/few-shot and fine-tuning approaches. Our findings show that while CoT prompting and fine-tuning with explanations approaches show improvements, the best results are produced by prompts that are derived from specific legal reasoning techniques such as IRAC (Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion). Based on our experiments we improve the 2021 best result from 0.7037 accuracy to 0.8148 accuracy and beat the 2022 best system of 0.6789 accuracy with an accuracy of 0.7431.

在回答问题时，人类会利用跨不同模式可用的信息来综合一致，完整的思想链（COT）。在深度学习模型（例如大规模语言模型）的情况下，这个过程通常是黑匣子。最近，科学问题基准已用于诊断AI系统的多跳推理能力和解释性。但是，现有数据集无法为答案提供注释，或仅限于仅文本模式，小尺度和有限的域多样性。为此，我们介绍了科学问题答案（SQA），这是一个新的基准，由〜21k的多模式多种选择问题组成，其中包含各种科学主题和答案的注释，并提供相应的讲座和解释。我们进一步设计语言模型，以学习将讲座和解释作为思想链（COT），以模仿回答SQA问题时的多跳上推理过程。 SQA在语言模型中展示了COT的实用性，因为COT将问题的答案绩效提高了1.20％的GPT-3和3.99％的unifiedqa。我们还探索了模型的上限，以通过喂食输入中的那些来利用解释；我们观察到它将GPT-3的少量性能提高了18.96％。我们的分析进一步表明，与人类类似的语言模型受益于解释，从较少的数据中学习并仅使用40％的数据实现相同的性能。

最近的研究表明，理性或逐步思想链可用于改善多步推理任务的性能。我们重新考虑了理由的提示，提示了几次射击中的内部学习学习，其中（输入 - >输出）提示将扩展到（输入，理由 - >输出）提示。对于以理由为提示的提示，我们证明了现有的方法（依赖手动及时工程）如何受到可能损害绩效的次级理由。为了减轻这种脆弱性，我们提出了一个统一的授权合奏的统一框架，在该框架中，我们将输出空间中的理由抽样确定为可鲁棒提高性能的关键组成部分。该框架是一般的，可以轻松地扩展到常见的自然语言处理任务，即使传统上不利于中间步骤的任务，例如问题回答，单词感官歧义和情感分析。我们证明，与现有的提示方法相比，以理由为原理的合奏获得了更准确和可解释的结果 - 包括标准提示，没有理由和基于理由的链链链，同时通过相关理性同时提高了模型预测的解释性。

我们挑战AI模型，以“展示”对《纽约客》标题比赛的复杂多模式幽默的理解。具体而言，我们开发了三个精心限制的任务，以掌握图像和标题之间的潜在复杂和意外的关系，并且对人类经验的广泛品种产生了复杂和意外的寓意；这些是纽约口径卡通的标志。我们调查了直接将卡通像素和字幕输入的视觉和语言模型，以及仅通过提供图像的文本描述来规避图像处理的仅限语言模型。即使我们为卡通图像提供了丰富的多方面注释，我们也可以确定高质量的机器学习模型（例如，微调，175b参数语言模型）和人类之间的性能差距。我们公开发布我们的语料库，包括描述图像的位置/实体的注释，场景的不寻常以及对笑话的解释。

语言理解的概率模型是可解释和结构化的，例如隐喻理解的模型描述了有关潜在主题和特征的推论。但是，这些模型是为特定任务手动设计的。大型语言模型（LLMS）可以通过内在的学习来执行许多任务，但它们缺乏概率模型的清晰结构。在本文中，我们使用经过思考的提示将概率模型的结构引入LLMS。这些提示导致该模型推断潜在变量和有关其关系的理由，以选择隐喻的适当释义。所选择的潜在变量和关系是由认知心理学理解理论得出的。我们将这些提示应用于GPT-3的两个最大版本，并表明它们可以改善释义选择。

We demonstrate that scaling up language models greatly improves task-agnostic, few-shot performance, sometimes even becoming competitive with prior state-ofthe-art fine-tuning approaches. Specifically, we train GPT-3, an autoregressive language model with 175 billion parameters, 10x more than any previous nonsparse language model, and test its performance in the few-shot setting. For all tasks, GPT-3 is applied without any gradient updates or fine-tuning, with tasks and few-shot demonstrations specified purely via text interaction with the model. GPT-3 achieves strong performance on many NLP datasets, including translation, question-answering, and cloze tasks. We also identify some datasets where GPT-3's few-shot learning still struggles, as well as some datasets where GPT-3 faces methodological issues related to training on large web corpora.

大型语言模型越来越能够通过相对较少的特定任务的监督产生流畅的出现文本。但这些模型可以准确解释分类决策吗？我们考虑使用少量人写的例子（即，以几滴方式）生成自由文本解释的任务。我们发现（1）创作更高质量的例子，以提示导致更高质量的世代; （2）令人惊讶的是，在头到头比较中，人群公司通常更喜欢GPT-3生成的解释，以众包中包含的人性写入的解释。然而，Crowdworker评级也表明，虽然模型产生了事实，语法和充分的解释，但它们具有改进的空间，例如沿着提供新颖信息和支持标签的轴。我们创建了一种管道，该管道将GPT-3与监督过滤器结合起来，该过滤器通过二进制可接受性判断来包含人类循环。尽管具有重要的主观性内在的判断可接受性，但我们的方法能够始终如一地过滤人类可接受的GPT-3生成的解释。

预测任务标签和为其预测生成自由文本阐述的自律化模型可以实现与NLP系统更直观的交互。然而，这些模型目前正在接受大量人为的自由文本解释，每个任务都会阻碍更广泛的使用。我们建议使用少数培训例子研究更现实的自律化建立。我们出示2月 - 一个标准化的四个现有英语数据集和相关指标。我们通过2月份广泛探索自然语言提示来确定正确的提示方法。然后，通过使用此提示并缩放模型大小，我们证明了几次拍摄自合合理化的进展。我们展示了这项任务的完善房间仍然有充足的改进空间：人类注册人评估的生成解释的平均合理性最多为51％，而人类解释的合理性是76％。我们希望2月份与我们的拟议方法一起促使社区承担几次拍摄的自我合理化挑战。

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in natural language understanding and generation, but the quality bar for medical and clinical applications is high. Today, attempts to assess models' clinical knowledge typically rely on automated evaluations on limited benchmarks. There is no standard to evaluate model predictions and reasoning across a breadth of tasks. To address this, we present MultiMedQA, a benchmark combining six existing open question answering datasets spanning professional medical exams, research, and consumer queries; and HealthSearchQA, a new free-response dataset of medical questions searched online. We propose a framework for human evaluation of model answers along multiple axes including factuality, precision, possible harm, and bias. In addition, we evaluate PaLM (a 540-billion parameter LLM) and its instruction-tuned variant, Flan-PaLM, on MultiMedQA. Using a combination of prompting strategies, Flan-PaLM achieves state-of-the-art accuracy on every MultiMedQA multiple-choice dataset (MedQA, MedMCQA, PubMedQA, MMLU clinical topics), including 67.6% accuracy on MedQA (US Medical License Exam questions), surpassing prior state-of-the-art by over 17%. However, human evaluation reveals key gaps in Flan-PaLM responses. To resolve this we introduce instruction prompt tuning, a parameter-efficient approach for aligning LLMs to new domains using a few exemplars. The resulting model, Med-PaLM, performs encouragingly, but remains inferior to clinicians. We show that comprehension, recall of knowledge, and medical reasoning improve with model scale and instruction prompt tuning, suggesting the potential utility of LLMs in medicine. Our human evaluations reveal important limitations of today's models, reinforcing the importance of both evaluation frameworks and method development in creating safe, helpful LLM models for clinical applications.

Finetuning language models on a collection of datasets phrased as instructions has been shown to improve model performance and generalization to unseen tasks. In this paper we explore instruction finetuning with a particular focus on (1) scaling the number of tasks, (2) scaling the model size, and (3) finetuning on chain-of-thought data. We find that instruction finetuning with the above aspects dramatically improves performance on a variety of model classes (PaLM, T5, U-PaLM), prompting setups (zero-shot, few-shot, CoT), and evaluation benchmarks (MMLU, BBH, TyDiQA, MGSM, open-ended generation). For instance, Flan-PaLM 540B instruction-finetuned on 1.8K tasks outperforms PALM 540B by a large margin (+9.4% on average). Flan-PaLM 540B achieves state-of-the-art performance on several benchmarks, such as 75.2% on five-shot MMLU. We also publicly release Flan-T5 checkpoints, which achieve strong few-shot performance even compared to much larger models, such as PaLM 62B. Overall, instruction finetuning is a general method for improving the performance and usability of pretrained language models.

The recent success of large language models for text generation poses a severe threat to academic integrity, as plagiarists can generate realistic paraphrases indistinguishable from original work. However, the role of large autoregressive transformers in generating machine-paraphrased plagiarism and their detection is still developing in the literature. This work explores T5 and GPT-3 for machine-paraphrase generation on scientific articles from arXiv, student theses, and Wikipedia. We evaluate the detection performance of six automated solutions and one commercial plagiarism detection software and perform a human study with 105 participants regarding their detection performance and the quality of generated examples. Our results suggest that large models can rewrite text humans have difficulty identifying as machine-paraphrased (53% mean acc.). Human experts rate the quality of paraphrases generated by GPT-3 as high as original texts (clarity 4.0/5, fluency 4.2/5, coherence 3.8/5). The best-performing detection model (GPT-3) achieves a 66% F1-score in detecting paraphrases.

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.

大型预训练的语言模型已经表现出了产生现实文本的强大功能。但是，控制生成结果仍然具有挑战性。以前的方法，例如提示远远不足，这限制了语言模型的使用。为了解决这一挑战，我们提出了一种创新的方法，逆提示，更好地控制文本生成。逆提示的核心思想是使用生成的文本来在波束搜索期间反转提示，这增强了提示和生成文本之间的相关性，并提供了更好的可控性。经验上，我们预先培训了大规模的汉语模型，在开放式诗歌生成和开放式长形问题的任务上使用人力评估进行系统研究。我们的研究结果表明，我们的提出方法显着优于基线，而我们的发电质量与某些任务中的某些任务接近人类性能。叙述者可以在https://pretrain.aminer.cn/apps/poetry.html上尝试我们的诗歌生成演示，而我们的QA演示可以在https://pretrain.aminer.cn/app/qa找到。对于研究人员来说，代码是在https://github.com/thudm/inverseprompting中提供的。

Students' ability to ask curious questions is a crucial skill that improves their learning processes. To train this skill, previous research has used a conversational agent that propose specific cues to prompt children's curiosity during learning. Despite showing pedagogical efficiency, this method is still limited since it relies on generating the said prompts by hand for each educational resource, which can be a very long and costly process. In this context, we leverage the advances in the natural language processing field and explore using a large language model (GPT-3) to automate the generation of this agent's curiosity-prompting cues to help children ask more and deeper questions. We then used this study to investigate a different curiosity-prompting behavior for the agent. The study was conducted with 75 students aged between 9 and 10. They either interacted with a hand-crafted conversational agent that proposes "closed" manually-extracted cues leading to predefined questions, a GPT-3-driven one that proposes the same type of cues, or a GPT-3-driven one that proposes "open" cues that can lead to several possible questions. Results showed a similar question-asking performance between children who had the two "closed" agents, but a significantly better one for participants with the "open" agent. Our first results suggest the validity of using GPT-3 to facilitate the implementation of curiosity-stimulating learning technologies. In a second step, we also show that GPT-3 can be efficient in proposing the relevant open cues that leave children with more autonomy to express their curiosity.

Natural language explanations promise to offer intuitively understandable explanations of a neural network's decision process in complex vision-language tasks, as pursued in recent VL-NLE models. While current models offer impressive performance on task accuracy and explanation plausibility, they suffer from a range of issues: Some models feature a modular design where the explanation generation module is poorly integrated with a separate module for task-answer prediction, employ backbone models trained on limited sets of tasks, or incorporate ad hoc solutions to increase performance on single datasets. We propose to evade these limitations by applying recent advances in large-scale multi-task pretraining of generative Transformer models to the problem of VL-NLE tasks. Our approach outperforms recent models by a large margin, with human annotators preferring the generated explanations over the ground truth in two out of three evaluated datasets. As a novel challenge in VL-NLE research, we propose the problem of multi-task VL-NLE and show that jointly training on multiple tasks can increase the explanation quality. We discuss the ethical implications of high-quality NLE generation and other issues in recent VL-NLE research.

从预训练的语言模型中进行的引导已被证明是用于建立基础视觉模型（VLM）的有效方法，例如图像字幕或视觉问题的答案。但是，很难用它来使模型符合用户的理由来获得特定答案。为了引起和加强常识性原因，我们提出了一个迭代采样和调整范式，称为Illume，执行以下循环：给定图像问题提示提示，VLM采样了多个候选人，并通过人类评论家通过偏好提供最小的反馈。选择，用于微调。该循环增加了训练数据，并逐渐雕刻出VLM的合理化功能。我们的详尽实验表明，Illume在使用较少的培训数据的同时，仅需要最少的反馈，与标准监督的微调竞争。

Generating a chain of thought (CoT) can increase large language model (LLM) performance on a wide range of tasks. Zero-shot CoT evaluations, however, have been conducted primarily on logical tasks (e.g. arithmetic, commonsense QA). In this paper, we perform a controlled evaluation of zero-shot CoT across two sensitive domains: harmful questions and stereotype benchmarks. We find that using zero-shot CoT reasoning in a prompt can significantly increase a model's likelihood to produce undesirable output. Without future advances in alignment or explicit mitigation instructions, zero-shot CoT should be avoided on tasks where models can make inferences about marginalized groups or harmful topics.

本文探讨了大语言模型的自然语言生成能力，并应用于编程课程中常见的两种学习资源类型。使用OpenAI Codex作为大语言模型，我们创建编程练习（包括示例解决方案和测试用例）和代码说明，从定性和定量上评估这些练习。我们的结果表明，大多数自动生成的内容既新颖又明智，在某些情况下可以按原样使用。在创建练习时，我们发现仅通过提供关键字作为模型输入来影响编程概念和它们所包含的上下文主题非常容易。我们的分析表明，大规模生成机器学习模型是指导者的工具，尽管仍然需要进行一些监督以确保生成的内容的质量在传递给学生之前。我们进一步讨论了OpenAI Codex和类似工具对入门编程教育的含义，并强调了未来的研究流，这些研究流有可能提高教师和学生的教育体验质量。

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。