Large language models (LLMs) are proficient at generating fluent text with minimal task-specific supervision. However, their ability to generate rationales for knowledge-intensive tasks (KITs) remains under-explored. Generating rationales for KIT solutions, such as commonsense multiple-choice QA, requires external knowledge to support predictions and refute alternate options. In this work, we consider the task of generating retrieval-augmented rationalization of KIT model predictions via external knowledge guidance within a few-shot setting. Surprisingly, crowd-workers preferred LLM-generated rationales over existing crowd-sourced rationales, generated in a similar knowledge-guided setting, on aspects such as factuality, sufficiency, and convincingness. However, fine-grained evaluation of such rationales highlights the need for further improvements in conciseness, novelty, and domain invariance. Additionally, through an expert-sourced study evaluating the reliability of the rationales, we demonstrate that humans’ trust in LLM-generated rationales erodes when communicated faithfully, i.e., without taking model prediction accuracy into account. We find that even instrumenting simple guardrails can be effective for reliable rationalization.

Large language models (LLMs) can label data faster and cheaper than humans for various NLP tasks. Despite their prowess, LLMs may fall short in understanding of complex, sociocultural, or domain-specific context, potentially leading to incorrect annotations. Therefore, we advocate a collaborative approach where humans and LLMs work together to produce reliable and high-quality labels. We present MEGAnno+, a human-LLM collaborative annotation system that offers effective LLM agent and annotation management, convenient and robust LLM annotation, and exploratory verification of LLM labels by humans.

Recently, active learning (AL) methods have been used to effectively fine-tune pre-trained language models for various NLP tasks such as sentiment analysis and document classification. However, given the task of fine-tuning language models, understanding the impact of different aspects on AL methods such as labeling cost, sample acquisition latency, and the diversity of the datasets necessitates a deeper investigation. This paper examines the performance of existing AL methods within a low-resource, interactive labeling setting. We observe that existing methods often underperform in such a setting while exhibiting higher latency and a lack of generalizability. To overcome these challenges, we propose a novel active learning method TYROUGE that employs a hybrid sampling strategy to minimize labeling cost and acquisition latency while providing a framework for adapting to dataset diversity via user guidance. Through our experiments, we observe that compared to SOTA methods, TYROUGE reduces the labeling cost by up to 43% and the acquisition latency by as much as 11X, while achieving comparable accuracy. Finally, we discuss the strengths and weaknesses of TYROUGE by exploring the impact of dataset characteristics.

We present MEGAnno, a novel exploratory annotation framework designed for NLP researchers and practitioners. Unlike existing labeling tools that focus on data labeling only, our framework aims to support a broader, iterative ML workflow including data exploration and model development. With MEGAnno’s API, users can programmatically explore the data through sophisticated search and automated suggestion functions and incrementally update task schema as their project evolve. Combined with our widget, the users can interactively sort, filter, and assign labels to multiple items simultaneously in the same notebook where the rest of the NLP project resides. We demonstrate MEGAnno’s flexible, exploratory, efficient, and seamless labeling experience through a sentiment analysis use case.