Recent advancements in tool learning have enabled large language models (LLMs) to integrate external tools, enhancing their task performance by expanding their knowledge boundaries. However, relying on tools often introduces trade-offs between performance, speed, and cost, with LLMs sometimes exhibiting overreliance and overconfidence in tool usage. This paper addresses the challenge of aligning LLMs with their knowledge boundaries to make more intelligent decisions about tool invocation. We propose a multi-objective alignment framework that combines probabilistic knowledge boundary estimation with dynamic decision-making, allowing LLMs to better assess when to invoke tools based on their confidence. Our framework includes two methods for knowledge boundary estimation—consistency-based and absolute estimation—and two training strategies for integrating these estimates into the model’s decision-making process. Experimental results on various tool invocation scenarios demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework, showing significant improvements in tool efficiency by reducing unnecessary tool usage.

Semantic parsing maps natural language (NL) utterances into logical forms (LFs), which underpins many advanced NLP problems. Semantic parsers gain performance boosts with deep neural networks, but inherit vulnerabilities against adversarial examples. In this paper, we provide the first empirical study on the robustness of semantic parsers in the presence of adversarial attacks. Formally, adversaries of semantic parsing are considered to be the perturbed utterance-LF pairs, whose utterances have exactly the same meanings as the original ones. A scalable methodology is proposed to construct robustness test sets based on existing benchmark corpora. Our results answered five research questions in measuring the sate-of-the-art parsers’ performance on robustness test sets, and evaluating the effect of data augmentation.