*Natural Language to Visualization* (NL2Vis) seeks to convert natural-language descriptions into visual representations of given tables, empowering users to derive insights from large-scale data. Recent advancements in *Large Language Models* (LLMs) show promise in automating code generation to transform tabular data into accessible visualizations. However, they often struggle with complex queries that require reasoning across multiple tables. To address this limitation, we propose a collaborative agent workflow, termed **nvAgent**, for NL2Vis. Specifically, **nvAgent** comprises three agents: a processor agent for database processing and context filtering, a composer agent for planning visualization generation, and a validator agent for code translation and output verification. Comprehensive evaluations on the new VisEval benchmark demonstrate that **nvAgent** consistently surpasses state-of-the-art baselines, achieving a 7.88% improvement in single-table and a 9.23% improvement in multi-table scenarios. Qualitative analyses further highlight that **nvAgent** maintains nearly a 20% performance margin over previous models, underscoring its capacity to produce high-quality visual representations from complex, heterogeneous data sources. All datasets and source code are available at: [https://github.com/geliang0114/nvAgent](https://github.com/geliang0114/nvAgent).

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly impacting human society, particularly in textual information. Based on more than 30,000 papers and 1,000 presentations from machine learning conferences, we examined and compared the words used in writing and speaking, representing the first large-scale study of how LLMs influence the two main modes of verbal communication and expression within the same group of people. Our empirical results show that LLM-style words such as significant have been used more frequently in abstracts and oral presentations. The implicit impact on human expression like writing and speaking is beginning to emerge and is likely to grow in the future. We take the first step in building an automated monitoring platform to record its longitudinal changes to call attention to the implicit influence and ripple effect of LLMs on human society.

With the rapid development and widespread application of Large Language Models (LLMs), the use of Machine-Generated Text (MGT) has become increasingly common, bringing with it potential risks, especially in terms of quality and integrity in fields like news, education, and science. Current research mainly focuses on purely MGT detection, without adequately addressing mixed scenarios including AI-revised Human-Written Text (HWT) or human-revised MGT. To tackle this challenge, we define mixtext, a form of mixed text involving both AI and human-generated content. Then we introduce MixSet, the first dataset dedicated to studying these mixtext scenarios. Leveraging MixSet, we executed comprehensive experiments to assess the efficacy of prevalent MGT detectors in handling mixtext situations, evaluating their performance in terms of effectiveness, robustness, and generalization. Our findings reveal that existing detectors struggle to identify mixtext, particularly in dealing with subtle modifications and style adaptability. This research underscores the urgent need for more fine-grain detectors tailored for mixtext, offering valuable insights for future research. Code and Models are available at https://github.com/Dongping-Chen/MixSet.

Deep neural networks exhibit vulnerability to word-level adversarial attacks in natural language processing. Most of these attack methods adopt synonymous substitutions to perturb original samples for crafting adversarial examples while attempting to maintain semantic consistency with the originals. Some of them claim that they could achieve over 90% attack success rate, thereby raising serious safety concerns. However, our investigation reveals that many purportedly successful adversarial examples are actually invalid due to significant changes in semantic meanings compared to their originals. Even when equipped with semantic constraints such as BERTScore, existing attack methods can generate up to 87.9% invalid adversarial examples. Building on this insight, we first curate a 13K dataset for adversarial validity evaluation with the help of GPT-4. Then, an open-source large language model is fine-tuned to offer an interpretable validity score for assessing the semantic consistency between original and adversarial examples. Finally, this validity score can serve as a guide for existing adversarial attack methods to generate valid adversarial examples. Comprehensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in evaluating and refining the quality of adversarial examples.