Multi-modal information retrieval (MMIR) is a rapidly evolving field where significant progress has been made through advanced representation learning and cross-modality alignment research, particularly in image-text pairing.However, current benchmarks for evaluating MMIR performance on image-text pairings overlook the scientific domain, which has a notable gap with the generic data since the caption of scientific charts and tables usually describes the analysis of experimental results or scientific principles in contrast to human activity or scenery depicted in generic images.To bridge this gap, we develop a scientific domain-specific MMIR benchmark (SciMMIR) by leveraging open-access research paper corpora to extract data relevant to the scientific domain. This benchmark comprises 530K meticulously curated image-text pairs, extracted from figures and tables with detailed captions from scientific documents.We further annotate the image-text pairs with a two-level subset-subcategory hierarchy to facilitate a more comprehensive evaluation of the baselines. We conduct zero-shot and fine-tuned evaluations on prominent multi-modal image-captioning and visual language models, such as CLIP, BLIP, and BLIP-2.Our findings offer critical insights for MMIR in the scientific domain, including the impact of pre-training and fine-tuning settings and the effects of different visual and textual encoders.

The long-standing one-to-many problem of gold standard responses in open-domain dialogue systems presents challenges for automatic evaluation metrics. Though prior works have demonstrated some success by applying powerful Large Language Models (LLMs), existing approaches still struggle with the one-to-many problem, and exhibit subpar performance in domain-specific scenarios. We assume the commonsense reasoning biases within LLMs may hinder their performance in domain-specific evaluations. To address both issues, we propose a novel framework SLIDE (Small and Large Integrated for Dialogue Evaluation), that leverages both a small, specialised model (SLM), and LLMs for the evaluation of open domain dialogues. Our approach introduces several techniques: (1) Contrastive learning to differentiate between robust and non-robust response embeddings; (2) A novel metric for semantic sensitivity that combines embedding cosine distances with similarity learned through neural networks, and (3) A strategy for incorporating the evaluation results from both the SLM and LLMs. Our empirical results demonstrate that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance in both the classification and evaluation tasks, and additionally the SLIDE evaluator exhibits better correlation with human judgements. Our code is available at https://github.com/hegehongcha/SLIDE-ACL2024.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across a wide range of natural language processing tasks. However, their enormous parameter size and extremely high requirements for compute power pose challenges for their practical deployment. Recent research has revealed that specific capabilities of LLMs, such as numerical reasoning, can be transferred to smaller models through distillation. Some studies explore the potential of leveraging LLMs to perform table-based reasoning. However, there has been no prior work focusing on table reasoning skills in smaller models specifically tailored for scientific table-to-text generation tasks. In this paper, we propose a novel table-based reasoning distillation approach, with the aim of distilling LLMs into tailored smaller models. Our experimental results have shown that a 220 million parameter model (Flan-T5-base) fine-tuned using distilled data, not only achieves a significant improvement compared to traditionally fine-tuned baselines, but also surpasses specific LLMs on a scientific table-to-text generation dataset. Our code is available at https://github.com/Bernard-Yang/DistillTableCoT.

The long-standing one-to-many issue of the open-domain dialogues poses significant challenges for automatic evaluation methods, i.e., there may be multiple suitable responses which differ in semantics for a given conversational context. To tackle this challenge, we propose a novel learning-based automatic evaluation metric (CMN), which can robustly evaluate open-domain dialogues by augmenting Conditional Variational Autoencoders (CVAEs) with a Next Sentence Prediction (NSP) objective and employing Mutual Information (MI) to model the semantic similarity of text in the latent space. Experimental results on two open-domain dialogue datasets demonstrate the superiority of our method compared with a wide range of baselines, especially in handling responses which are distant to the “golden” reference responses in semantics.

Fairness has become a trending topic in natural language processing (NLP) and covers biases targeting certain social groups such as genders and religions. Yet regional bias, another long-standing global discrimination problem, remains unexplored still. Consequently, we intend to provide a study to analyse the regional bias learned by the pre-trained language models (LMs) that are broadly used in NLP tasks. While verifying the existence of regional bias in LMs, we find that the biases on regional groups can be largely affected by the corresponding geographical clustering. We accordingly propose a hierarchical regional bias evaluation method (HERB) utilising the information from the sub-region clusters to quantify the bias in the pre-trained LMs. Experiments show that our hierarchical metric can effectively evaluate the regional bias with regard to comprehensive topics and measure the potential regional bias that can be propagated to downstream tasks. Our codes are available at https://github.com/Bernard-Yang/HERB.