We introduce BSDetector, a method for detecting bad and speculative answers from a pretrained Large Language Model by estimating a numeric confidence score for any output it generated. Our uncertainty quantification technique works for any LLM accessible only via a black-box API, whose training data remains unknown. By expending a bit of extra computation, users of any LLM API can now get the same response as they would ordinarily, as well as a confidence estimate that cautions when not to trust this response. Experiments on both closed and open-form Question-Answer benchmarks reveal that BSDetector more accurately identifies incorrect LLM responses than alternative uncertainty estimation procedures (for both GPT-3 and ChatGPT). By sampling multiple responses from the LLM and considering the one with the highest confidence score, we can additionally obtain more accurate responses from the same LLM, without extra training steps. In applications involving automated evaluation with LLMs, accounting for our confidence scores leads to more reliable evaluation in both human-in-the-loop and fully-automated settings (across both GPT 3.5 and 4).

Large language models (LLMs), despite their breakthroughs on many challenging benchmark tasks, prefer to generate verbose responses and lack the controllability of output complexity, which is usually preferred by human users in practice. In this paper, we study how to precisely control multiple linguistic complexities of LLM output by finetuning using off-the-shelf data. To this end, we propose multi-control tuning (MCTune), which includes multiple linguistic complexity values of ground-truth responses as controls in the input for instruction tuning. We finetune LLaMA2-7B on Alpaca-GPT4 and WizardLM datasets. Evaluations on widely used benchmarks demonstrate that our method does not only improve LLMs’ multi-complexity controllability substantially but also retains or even enhances the quality of the responses as a side benefit.

Making LLMs speak for different, especially minority groups of people, and generate statements supporting their diverse or even controversial perspectives is critical to creating an inclusive environment. However, existing LLMs lack sufficient controllability to the stance of their generated content, which often contains inconsistent, neutral, or biased statements. In this paper, we improve the controllability of LLMs in generating statements supporting an argument the user defined in the prompt. We find that multi-round debates between two LLMs with opposite stances generate higher-quality and more salient statements for each, which are important training data to improve the controllability of LLMs. Motivated by this, we develop a novel debate & tuning (“DEBATUNE”) pipeline finetuning LLMs to generate the statements obtained via debate. To examine DEBATUNE, we curate the largest dataset of debate topics so far, which covers 710 controversial topics and corresponding arguments for each topic. Evaluations by the GPT-4 judge with a novel controversy controllability metric show that LLMs’ capability of generating diverse perspectives is significantly improved by DEBATUNE. Moreover, such controllability can be generalized to unseen topics, generating high-quality statements supporting controversial arguments.

Instruction tuning is critical to large language models (LLMs) for achieving better instruction following and task adaptation capabilities but its success heavily relies on the training data quality. Many recent methods focus on improving the data quality but often overlook the compatibility of the data with the student model being finetuned. This paper introduces Selective Reflection-Tuning, a novel paradigm that synergizes a teacher LLM’s reflection and introspection for improving existing data quality with the data selection capability of the student LLM, to automatically refine existing instruction-tuning data. This teacher-student collaboration produces high-quality and student-compatible instruction-response pairs, resulting in sample-efficient instruction tuning and LLMs of superior performance. Selective Reflection-Tuning is a data augmentation and synthesis that generally improves LLM finetuning and self-improvement without collecting brand-new data. We apply our method to Alpaca and WizardLM data and achieve much stronger and top-tier 7B and 13B LLMs.

In the realm of Large Language Models (LLMs), the balance between instruction data quality and quantity is a focal point. Recognizing this, we introduce a self-guided methodology for LLMs to autonomously discern and select cherry samples from open-source datasets, effectively minimizing manual curation and potential cost for instruction tuning an LLM. Our key innovation, the Instruction-Following Difficulty (IFD) metric, emerges as a pivotal metric to identify discrepancies between a model’s expected responses and its intrinsic generation capability. Through the application of IFD, cherry samples can be pinpointed, leading to a marked uptick in model training efficiency. Empirical validations on datasets like Alpaca and WizardLM underpin our findings; with a mere 10% of original data input, our strategy showcases improved results. This synthesis of self-guided cherry-picking and the IFD metric signifies a transformative leap in the instruction tuning of LLMs, promising both efficiency and resource-conscious advancements. Codes, data, and models are available.

Recent studies show that prompt tuning can better leverage the power of large language models than fine-tuning on downstream natural language understanding tasks. However, the existing prompt tuning methods have training instability issues, as the variance of scores under different random seeds is quite large. To address this critical problem, we first investigate and find that the loss landscape of vanilla prompt tuning is precipitous when it is visualized, where a slight change of input data can cause a big fluctuation in the loss landscape. This is an essential factor that leads to the instability of prompt tuning. Based on this observation, we introduce perturbation-based regularizers, which can smooth the loss landscape, into prompt tuning. We propose a new algorithm, called Prompt Tuning with Perturbation-based regularizer (PTP), which can not only alleviate training instability dramatically but also boost the performance of prompt tuning. We design two kinds of perturbation-based regularizers, including random-noise-based and adversarial-based. In particular, our proposed perturbations are flexible on both text space and embedding space. Extensive experiments show the effectiveness of our proposed methods in stabilizing the training. Our new algorithms improve the state-of-the-art prompt tuning methods by 1.94% and 2.34% on SuperGLUE and FewGLUE benchmarks, respectively.

Large language models (LLMs) are capable to perform complex reasoning by in-context learning (ICL) when provided with a few input-output demonstrations (demos) and more powerful when intermediate reasoning steps (chain of thoughts (CoT)) of the demos are given. Is it necessary to use multi-demo in ICL? In this paper, we study ICL using fewer demos for each test query on the tasks in (Wei et al., 2022). Surprisingly, we do not observe significant degradation when using only one randomly chosen demo. To study this phenomenon, for each test query, we categorize demos into “positive demos” leading to the correct answer, and “negative demos” resulting in wrong answers. Our analysis reveals an inherent bias in those widely studied datasets and the redundancy of demos: most demos are positive for a majority of test queries, which explains the good performance of ICL with one random demo. Moreover, ICL (with and w/o CoT) using only one positive demo significantly outperforms multi-demo ICL adopted by most previous works, indicating the weakness of LLMs in finding positive demo(s) for input queries, which is difficult to evaluate on the biased datasets. Furthermore, we observe a counterintuitive behavior of ICL using multi-demo, i.e., its accuracy degrades(improves) when given more positive(negative) demos. This implies that ICL can be easily misguided by interference among demos and their spurious correlations. Our analyses highlight several fundamental challenges that need to be addressed in LLMs training, ICL, and benchmark design.