Language models (LMs) are trained on collections of documents, written by individual human agents to achieve specific goals in an outside world. During training, LMs have access only to text of these documents, with no direct evidence of the internal states of the agents that produced them -- a fact often used to argue that LMs are incapable of modeling goal-directed aspects of human language production and comprehension. Can LMs trained on text learn anything at all about the relationship between language and use? I argue that LMs are models of intentional communication in a specific, narrow sense. When performing next word prediction given a textual context, an LM can infer and represent properties of an agent likely to have produced that context. These representations can in turn influence subsequent LM generation in the same way that agents' communicative intentions influence their language. I survey findings from the recent literature showing that -- even in today's non-robust and error-prone models -- LMs infer and use representations of fine-grained communicative intentions and more abstract beliefs and goals. Despite the limited nature of their training data, they can thus serve as building blocks for systems that communicate and act intentionally.

Language models (LMs) often generate incoherent outputs: they refer to events and entity states that are incompatible with the state of the world described in their inputs. We introduce SituationSupervision, a family of approaches for improving coherence in LMs by training them to construct and condition on explicit representations of entities and their states. SituationSupervision has two components: an auxiliary situation modeling task that trains models to predict state representations in context, and a latent state inference procedure that imputes these states from partially annotated training data. SituationSupervision can be applied to both fine-tuning (by supervising LMs to encode state variables in their hidden representations) and prompting (by inducing LMs to interleave textual descriptions of entity states with output text). In both cases, SituationSupervision requires only a small number of state annotations to produce major coherence improvements (between 4-11%), showing that standard LMs can be sample-efficiently trained to model not just language but the situations it describes.

The success of the large neural language models on many NLP tasks is exciting. However, we find that these successes sometimes lead to hype in which these models are being described as "understanding" language or capturing "meaning". In this position paper, we argue that a system trained only on form has a priori no way to learn meaning. In keeping with the ACL 2020 theme of "Taking Stock of Where We've Been and Where We're Going", we argue that a clear understanding of the distinction between form and meaning will help guide the field towards better science around natural language understanding.

Pragmatics is an essential part of communication, but it remains unclear what mechanisms underlie human pragmatic communication and whether NLP systems capture pragmatic language understanding. To investigate both these questions, we perform a fine-grained comparison of language models and humans on seven pragmatic phenomena, using zero-shot prompting on an expert-curated set of English materials. We ask whether models (1) select pragmatic interpretations of speaker utterances, (2) make similar error patterns as humans, and (3) use similar linguistic cues as humans to solve the tasks. We find that the largest models achieve high accuracy and match human error patterns: within incorrect responses, models favor the literal interpretation of an utterance over heuristic-based distractors. We also find evidence that models and humans are sensitive to similar linguistic cues. Our results suggest that even paradigmatic pragmatic phenomena may be solved without explicit representations of other agents' mental states, and that artificial models can be used to gain mechanistic insights into human pragmatic processing.

Recent progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has renewed interest in building systems that learn and think like people. Many advances have come from using deep neural networks trained end-to-end in tasks such as object recognition, video games, and board games, achieving performance that equals or even beats humans in some respects. Despite their biological inspiration and performance achievements, these systems differ from human intelligence in crucial ways. We review progress in cognitive science suggesting that truly human-like learning and thinking machines will have to reach beyond current engineering trends in both what they learn, and how they learn it. Specifically, we argue that these machines should (a) build causal models of the world that support explanation and understanding, rather than merely solving pattern recognition problems; (b) ground learning in intuitive theories of physics and psychology, to support and enrich the knowledge that is learned; and (c) harness compositionality and learning-to-learn to rapidly acquire and generalize knowledge to new tasks and situations. We suggest concrete challenges and promising routes towards these goals that can combine the strengths of recent neural network advances with more structured cognitive models.

深度神经语言模型的最新进展与大规模数据集的能力相结合，加速了自然语言生成系统的发展，这些系统在多种任务和应用程序上下文中产生流利和连贯的文本（在各种成功程度上）。但是，为所需的用户控制这些模型的输出仍然是一个开放的挑战。这不仅对于自定义生成语言的内容和样式至关重要，而且对于他们在现实世界中的安全可靠部署至关重要。我们提出了一项关于受约束神经语言生成的新兴主题的广泛调查，在该主题中，我们通过区分条件和约束（后者是在输出文本上而不是输入的可检验条件），正式定义和分类自然语言生成问题，目前是可检验的）约束文本生成任务，并查看受限文本生成的现有方法和评估指标。我们的目的是强调这个新兴领域的最新进展和趋势，以告知最有希望的方向和局限性，以推动受约束神经语言生成研究的最新作品。

自然语言处理（NLP）已成为当前人工智能繁荣中的主要应用领域之一。转移学习已经启用了大量深入学习的神经网络，接受了语言建模任务，以大大提高了所有语言任务的性能。有趣的是，当模型培训使用包含软件代码的数据培训时，它们在从自然语言规范中生成功能计算机代码时展示了显着的能力。我们认为这是一种难题，用于神经模型为生成词组结构语法提供了一种替代理论，以说明语言有效。由于编程语言的语法由短语结构语法决定，因此成功的神经模型显然是对编程语言的理论基础的理论基础，以及通过扩展，自然语言来实现。我们认为语言模型的术语模型是误导性的，因为深度学习模型不是语言的理论模型，并提出采用语料库模型，这更好地反映了模型的成因和内容。

自然语言处理的机器学习快速进步有可能改变有关人类学习语言的辩论。但是，当前人工学习者和人类的学习环境和偏见以削弱从学习模拟获得的证据的影响的方式分歧。例如，当今最有效的神经语言模型接受了典型儿童可用的语言数据量的大约一千倍。为了增加计算模型的可学习性结果的相关性，我们需要培训模型学习者，而没有比人类具有显着优势的学习者。如果合适的模型成功地获得了一些目标语言知识，则可以提供一个概念证明，即在假设的人类学习方案中可以学习目标。合理的模型学习者将使我们能够进行实验操作，以对学习环境中的变量进行因果推断，并严格测试史密斯风格的贫困声明，主张根据人类对人类的先天语言知识，基于有关可学习性的猜测。由于实用和道德的考虑因素，人类受试者将永远无法实现可比的实验，从而使模型学习者成为必不可少的资源。到目前为止，试图剥夺当前模型的不公平优势，为关键语法行为（例如可接受性判断）获得亚人类结果。但是，在我们可以合理地得出结论，语言学习需要比当前模型拥有更多的特定领域知识，我们必须首先以多模式刺激和多代理互动的形式探索非语言意见，以使学习者更有效地学习学习者来自有限的语言输入。

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.

Controllable Text Generation (CTG) is emerging area in the field of natural language generation (NLG). It is regarded as crucial for the development of advanced text generation technologies that are more natural and better meet the specific constraints in practical applications. In recent years, methods using large-scale pre-trained language models (PLMs), in particular the widely used transformer-based PLMs, have become a new paradigm of NLG, allowing generation of more diverse and fluent text. However, due to the lower level of interpretability of deep neural networks, the controllability of these methods need to be guaranteed. To this end, controllable text generation using transformer-based PLMs has become a rapidly growing yet challenging new research hotspot. A diverse range of approaches have emerged in the recent 3-4 years, targeting different CTG tasks which may require different types of controlled constraints. In this paper, we present a systematic critical review on the common tasks, main approaches and evaluation methods in this area. Finally, we discuss the challenges that the field is facing, and put forward various promising future directions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first survey paper to summarize CTG techniques from the perspective of PLMs. We hope it can help researchers in related fields to quickly track the academic frontier, providing them with a landscape of the area and a roadmap for future research.

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。

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。

最近围绕语言处理模型的复杂性的最新炒作使人们对机器获得了类似人类自然语言的指挥的乐观情绪。人工智能中自然语言理解的领域声称在这一领域取得了长足的进步，但是，在这方面和其他学科中使用“理解”的概念性清晰，使我们很难辨别我们实际上有多近的距离。目前的方法和剩余挑战的全面，跨学科的概述尚待进行。除了语言知识之外，这还需要考虑我们特定于物种的能力，以对，记忆，标签和传达我们（足够相似的）体现和位置经验。此外，测量实际约束需要严格分析当前模型的技术能力，以及对理论可能性和局限性的更深入的哲学反思。在本文中，我将所有这些观点（哲学，认知语言和技术）团结在一起，以揭开达到真实（人类般的）语言理解所涉及的挑战。通过解开当前方法固有的理论假设，我希望说明我们距离实现这一目标的实际程度，如果确实是目标。

本次调查绘制了用于分析社交媒体数据的生成方法的研究状态的广泛的全景照片（Sota）。它填补了空白，因为现有的调查文章在其范围内或被约会。我们包括两个重要方面，目前正在挖掘和建模社交媒体的重要性：动态和网络。社会动态对于了解影响影响或疾病的传播，友谊的形成，友谊的形成等，另一方面，可以捕获各种复杂关系，提供额外的洞察力和识别否则将不会被注意的重要模式。

Natural Language Generation (NLG) has improved exponentially in recent years thanks to the development of sequence-to-sequence deep learning technologies such as Transformer-based language models. This advancement has led to more fluent and coherent NLG, leading to improved development in downstream tasks such as abstractive summarization, dialogue generation and data-to-text generation. However, it is also apparent that deep learning based generation is prone to hallucinate unintended text, which degrades the system performance and fails to meet user expectations in many real-world scenarios. To address this issue, many studies have been presented in measuring and mitigating hallucinated texts, but these have never been reviewed in a comprehensive manner before. In this survey, we thus provide a broad overview of the research progress and challenges in the hallucination problem in NLG. The survey is organized into two parts: (1) a general overview of metrics, mitigation methods, and future directions; and (2) an overview of task-specific research progress on hallucinations in the following downstream tasks, namely abstractive summarization, dialogue generation, generative question answering, data-to-text generation, machine translation, and visual-language generation. This survey serves to facilitate collaborative efforts among researchers in tackling the challenge of hallucinated texts in NLG.

鉴于大型语言模型的广泛能力，应该有可能朝着一般的文本的助手工作，这些助手与人类价值一致，这意味着它是有帮助，诚实的和无害的。在此方向上的初始遗传，我们研究简单的基线技术和评估，例如提示。我们发现，从模型规模增加适度的干预措施的好处，概括为各种对准评估，并不会损害大型模型的性能。接下来，我们调查与对齐，比较仿制，二进制歧视和排名偏好建模相关的几个培训目标的缩放趋势。我们发现排名优先级模型比模仿学习更好地表现得多，并且通常以模型大小更有利地缩放。相比之下，二进制歧视通常与模仿学习非常类似地执行和缩放。最后，我们研究了一种“偏好模型预训练阶段的培训阶段，其目的是在对人偏好的芬明时提高样本效率。

There has been a recent resurgence in the area of explainable artificial intelligence as researchers and practitioners seek to make their algorithms more understandable. Much of this research is focused on explicitly explaining decisions or actions to a human observer, and it should not be controversial to say that looking at how humans explain to each other can serve as a useful starting point for explanation in artificial intelligence. However, it is fair to say that most work in explainable artificial intelligence uses only the researchers' intuition of what constitutes a 'good' explanation. There exists vast and valuable bodies of research in philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science of how people define, generate, select, evaluate, and present explanations, which argues that people employ certain cognitive biases and social expectations towards the explanation process. This paper argues that the field of explainable artificial intelligence should build on this existing research, and reviews relevant papers from philosophy, cognitive psychology/science, and social psychology, which study these topics. It draws out some important findings, and discusses ways that these can be infused with work on explainable artificial intelligence.

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。

语言是协调问题的强大解决方案：他们提供了稳定的，有关我们所说的单词如何对应于我们头脑中的信仰和意图的共同期望。然而，在变量和非静止社会环境中的语言使用需要语言表征来灵活：旧词在飞行中获取新的临时或合作伙伴特定含义。在本文中，我们介绍了柴（通过推理的连续分层适应），一个分层贝叶斯的协调理论和会议组织，旨在在这两个基本观察之间调和长期张力。我们认为，沟通的中央计算问题不仅仅是传输，如在经典配方中，而是在多个时间尺度上持续学习和适应。合作伙伴特定的共同点迅速出现在数型互动中的社会推论中，而社群范围内的社会公约是稳定的前锋，这些前锋已经抽象出与多个合作伙伴的互动。我们展示了新的实证数据，展示了我们的模型为多个现象提供了对先前账户挑战的计算基础：（1）与同一合作伙伴的重复互动的更有效的参考表达的融合（2）将合作伙伴特定的共同基础转移到陌生人，并（3）交际范围的影响最终会形成。

一个令人着迷的假设是，人类和动物的智力可以通过一些原则（而不是启发式方法的百科全书清单）来解释。如果这个假设是正确的，我们可以更容易地理解自己的智能并建造智能机器。就像物理学一样，原理本身不足以预测大脑等复杂系统的行为，并且可能需要大量计算来模拟人类式的智力。这一假设将表明，研究人类和动物所剥削的归纳偏见可以帮助阐明这些原则，并为AI研究和神经科学理论提供灵感。深度学习已经利用了几种关键的归纳偏见，这项工作考虑了更大的清单，重点是关注高级和顺序有意识的处理的工作。阐明这些特定原则的目的是，它们有可能帮助我们建立从人类的能力中受益于灵活分布和系统概括的能力的AI系统，目前，这是一个领域艺术机器学习和人类智力。