This is an internal, incomplete preview of a proposed change to the ACL Anthology.
For efficiency reasons, we don't generate MODS or Endnote formats, and the preview may be incomplete in other ways, or contain mistakes.
Do not treat this content as an official publication.
DelongChen
Fixing paper assignments
Please select all papers that do not belong to this person.
Indicate below which author they should be assigned to.
We introduce a novel analysis that leverages linguistic minimal pairs to probe the internal linguistic representations of Large Language Models (LLMs). By measuring the similarity between LLM activation differences across minimal pairs, we quantify the linguistic similarity and gain insight into the linguistic knowledge captured by LLMs. Our large-scale experiments, spanning 100+ LLMs and 150k minimal pairs in three languages, reveal properties of linguistic similarity from four key aspects: consistency across LLMs, relation to theoretical categorizations, dependency to semantic context, and cross-lingual alignment of relevant phenomena. Our findings suggest that 1) linguistic similarity is significantly influenced by training data exposure, leading to higher cross-LLM agreement in higher-resource languages. 2) Linguistic similarity strongly aligns with fine-grained theoretical linguistic categories but weakly with broader ones. 3) Linguistic similarity shows a weak correlation with semantic similarity, showing its context-dependent nature. 4) LLMs exhibit limited cross-lingual alignment in their understanding of relevant linguistic phenomena. This work demonstrates the potential of minimal pairs as a window into the neural representations of language in LLMs, shedding light on the relationship between LLMs and linguistic theory.
While densely annotated image captions significantly facilitate the learning of robust vision-language alignment, methodologies for systematically optimizing human annotation efforts remain underexplored. We introduce Chain-of-Talkers (CoTalk), an AI-in-the-loop methodology designed to maximize the number of annotated samples and improve their comprehensiveness under fixed budget constraints (e.g., total human annotation time). The framework is built upon two key insights. First, sequential annotation reduces redundant workload compared to conventional parallel annotation, as subsequent annotators only need to annotate the “residual”—the missing visual information that previous annotations have not covered. Second, humans process textual input faster by reading while outputting annotations with much higher throughput via talking; thus a multimodal interface enables optimized efficiency. We evaluate our framework from two aspects: intrinsic evaluations that assess the comprehensiveness of semantic units, obtained by parsing detailed captions into object-attribute trees and analyzing their effective connections; extrinsic evaluation measures the practical usage of the annotated captions in facilitating vision-language alignment. Experiments with eight participants show our Chain-of-Talkers (CoTalk) improves annotation speed (0.42 vs. 0.30 units/sec) and retrieval performance (41.13% vs. 40.52%) over the parallel method.
This paper establishes a formal information-theoretic framework for image captioning, conceptualizing captions as compressed linguistic representations that selectively encode semantic units in images. Our framework posits that good image captions should balance three key aspects: informationally sufficient, minimally redundant, and readily comprehensible by humans. By formulating these aspects as quantitative measures with adjustable weights, our framework provides a flexible foundation for analyzing and optimizing image captioning systems across diverse task requirements. To demonstrate its applicability, we introduce the Pyramid of Captions (PoCa) method, which generates enriched captions by integrating local and global visual information. We present both theoretical proof that PoCa improves caption quality under certain assumptions, and empirical validation of its effectiveness across various image captioning models and datasets.
The widespread application of Large Language Models (LLMs) across various tasks and fields has necessitated the alignment of these models with human values and preferences. Given various approaches of human value alignment, such as Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF), constitutional learning, and safety fine-tuning etc., there is an urgent need to understand the scope and nature of human values injected into these LLMs before their deployment and adoption. We propose UniVar, a high-dimensional neural representation of symbolic human value distributions in LLMs, orthogonal to model architecture and training data. This is a continuous and scalable representation, self-supervised from the value-relevant output of 8 LLMs and evaluated on 15 open-source and commercial LLMs. Through UniVar, we visualize and explore how LLMs prioritize different values in 25 languages and cultures, shedding light on the complex interplay between human values and language modeling.
We propose to measure political bias in LLMs by analyzing both the content and style of their generated content regarding political issues. Existing benchmarks and measures focus on gender and racial biases. However, political bias exists in LLMs and can lead to polarization and other harms in downstream applications. In order to provide transparency to users, we advocate that there should be fine-grained and explainable measures of political biases generated by LLMs. Our proposed measure looks at different political issues such as reproductive rights and climate change, at both the content (the substance of the generation) and the style (the lexical polarity) of such bias. We measured the political bias in eleven open-sourced LLMs and showed that our proposed framework is easily scalable to other topics and is explainable.
The hallucination problem of Large Language Models (LLMs) significantly limits their reliability and trustworthiness. Humans have a self-awareness process that allows us to recognize what we don’t know when faced with queries. Inspired by this, our paper investigates whether LLMs can estimate their own hallucination risk before response generation. We analyze the internal mechanisms of LLMs broadly both in terms of training data sources and across 15 diverse Natural Language Generation (NLG) tasks, spanning over 700 datasets. Our empirical analysis reveals two key insights: (1) LLM internal states indicate whether they have seen the query in training data or not; and (2) LLM internal states show they are likely to hallucinate or not regarding the query. Our study explores particular neurons, activation layers, and tokens that play a crucial role in the LLM perception of uncertainty and hallucination risk. By a probing estimator, we leverage LLM self-assessment, achieving an average hallucination estimation accuracy of 84.32% at run time.