Web agents are emerging as powerful tools capable of performing complex tasks across diverse web environments. The rapid development of large multimodal models is further enhancing this advancement. However, there is a lack of standardized and user-friendly tools for research and development, as well as experimental platforms on live websites. To address this challenge, we present WebOlympus, an open platform for web agents operating on live websites. WebOlympus offers a Chrome extension-based UI, enabling users without programming experience to easily utilize the platform. It allows users to run web agents with various designs using only a few lines of code or simple clicks on the Chrome extension. To ensure the trustworthiness of web agents, a safety monitor module that prevents harmful actions through human supervision or model-based control is incorporated. WebOlympus supports diverse applications, including annotation interfaces for web agent trajectories and data crawling.

Modern generative search engines enhance the reliability of large language model (LLM) responses by providing cited evidence. However, evaluating the answer’s attribution, i.e., whether every claim within the generated responses is fully supported by its cited evidence, remains an open problem. This verification, traditionally dependent on costly human evaluation, underscores the urgent need for automatic attribution evaluation methods. To bridge the gap in the absence of standardized benchmarks for these methods, we present AttributionBench, a comprehensive benchmark compiled from various existing attribution datasets. Our extensive experiments on AttributionBench reveal the challenges of automatic attribution evaluation, even for state-of-the-art LLMs. Specifically, our findings show that even a fine-tuned GPT-3.5 only achieves around 80% macro-F1 under a binary classification formulation. A detailed analysis of more than 300 error cases indicates that a majority of failures stem from the model’s inability to process nuanced information, and the discrepancy between the information the model has access to and that human annotators do.

The rapid progress in open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) is significantly driving AI development forward. However, there is still a limited understanding of their trustworthiness. Deploying these models at scale without sufficient trustworthiness can pose significant risks, highlighting the need to uncover these issues promptly. In this work, we conduct an adversarial assessment of open-source LLMs on trustworthiness, scrutinizing them across eight different aspects including toxicity, stereotypes, ethics, hallucination, fairness, sycophancy, privacy, and robustness against adversarial demonstrations. We propose advCoU, an extended Chain of Utterances-based (CoU) prompting strategy by incorporating carefully crafted malicious demonstrations for trustworthiness attack. Our extensive experiments encompass recent and representative series of open-source LLMs, including Vicuna, MPT, Falcon, Mistral, and Llama 2. The empirical outcomes underscore the efficacy of our attack strategy across diverse aspects. More interestingly, our result analysis reveals that models with superior performance in general NLP tasks do not always have greater trustworthiness; in fact, larger models can be more vulnerable to attacks. Additionally, models that have undergone instruction tuning, focusing on instruction following, tend to be more susceptible, although fine-tuning LLMs for safety alignment proves effective in mitigating adversarial trustworthiness attacks.

Semi-structured tables are ubiquitous. There has been a variety of tasks that aim to automatically interpret, augment, and query tables. Current methods often require pretraining on tables or special model architecture design, are restricted to specific table types, or have simplifying assumptions about tables and tasks. This paper makes the first step towards developing open-source large language models (LLMs) as generalists for a diversity of table-based tasks. Towards that end, we construct TableInstruct, a new dataset with a variety of realistic tables and tasks, for instruction tuning and evaluating LLMs. We further develop the first open-source generalist model for tables, TableLlama, by fine-tuning Llama 2 (7B) with LongLoRA to address the long context challenge. We experiment under both in-domain setting and out-of-domain setting. On 7 out of 8 in-domain tasks, TableLlama achieves comparable or better performance than the SOTA for each task, despite the latter often has task-specific design. On 6 out-of-domain datasets, it achieves 5-44 absolute point gains compared with the base model, showing that training on TableInstruct enhances the model’s generalizability. We open-source our dataset and trained model to boost future work on developing open generalist models for tables.

Counter narratives - informed responses to hate speech contexts designed to refute hateful claims and de-escalate encounters - have emerged as an effective hate speech intervention strategy. While previous work has proposed automatic counter narrative generation methods to aid manual interventions, the evaluation of these approaches remains underdeveloped. Previous automatic metrics for counter narrative evaluation lack alignment with human judgment as they rely on superficial reference comparisons instead of incorporating key aspects of counter narrative quality as evaluation criteria. To address prior evaluation limitations, we propose a novel evaluation framework prompting LLMs to provide scores and feedback for generated counter narrative candidates using 5 defined aspects derived from guidelines from counter narrative specialized NGOs. We found that LLM evaluators achieve strong alignment to human-annotated scores and feedback and outperform alternative metrics, indicating their potential as multi-aspect, reference-free and interpretable evaluators for counter narrative evaluation.

This tutorial seeks to provide a systematic summary of risks and vulnerabilities in security, privacy and copyright aspects of large language models (LLMs), and most recent solutions to address those issues. We will discuss a broad thread of studies that try to answer the following questions: (i) How do we unravel the adversarial threats that attackers may leverage in the training time of LLMs, especially those that may exist in recent paradigms of instruction tuning and RLHF processes? (ii) How do we guard the LLMs against malicious attacks in inference time, such as attacks based on backdoors and jailbreaking? (iii) How do we ensure privacy protection of user information and LLM decisions for Language Model as-a-Service (LMaaS)? (iv) How do we protect the copyright of an LLM? (v) How do we detect and prevent cases where personal or confidential information is leaked during LLM training? (vi) How should we make policies to control against improper usage of LLM-generated content? In addition, will conclude the discussions by outlining emergent challenges in security, privacy and reliability of LLMs that deserve timely investigation by the community

We present our findings from a usability study of an interactive semantic parsing system for knowledge based question answering (KBQA). The system is designed to help users access information within a knowledge base without having to know its query language. The system translates the user’s question into the query language, retrieves an answer, then presents an English explanation of the process so that the user can make corrections if necessary. To our knowledge, our work is the most thorough usability study conducted for such a system and the only one that uses crowdworkers as participants to verify that the system is usable for average users. Our crowdworkers participate in KBQA dialogues using 4 versions of a system based on the framework by Mo et al. (2022) and answer surveys about their experiences. Some key takeaways from this work are: 1) we provide evidence for the benefits of interactivity in semantic parsing with human users and using generated questions in lieu of templated representations, 2) we identify limitations of simulations and provide contrasting evidence from actual system use, and 3) we provide an examination of crowdsourcing methodology, in particular the trade-offs of using crowdworkers vs. a specially trained group of evaluators.

In this paper, we examine how large language models (LLMs) solve multi-step problems under a language agent framework with three components: a generator, a discriminator, and a planning method. We investigate the practical utility of two advanced planning methods, iterative correction and tree search. We present a comprehensive analysis of how discrimination accuracy affects the overall performance of agents when using these two methods or a simpler method, re-ranking. Experiments on two tasks, text-to-SQL parsing and mathematical reasoning, show that: (1) advanced planning methods demand discriminators with at least 90% accuracy to achieve significant improvements over re-ranking; (2) current LLMs’ discrimination abilities have not met the needs of advanced planning methods to achieve such improvements; (3) with LLM-based discriminators, advanced planning methods may not adequately balance accuracy and efficiency. For example, compared to the other two methods, tree search is at least 10–20 times slower but leads to negligible performance gains, which hinders its real-world applications.

Privacy concerns have attracted increasing attention in data-driven products due to the tendency of machine learning models to memorize sensitive training data. Generating synthetic versions of such data with a formal privacy guarantee, such as differential privacy (DP), provides a promising path to mitigating these privacy concerns, but previous approaches in this direction have typically failed to produce synthetic data of high quality. In this work, we show that a simple and practical recipe in the text domain is effective: simply fine-tuning a pretrained generative language model with DP enables the model to generate useful synthetic text with strong privacy protection. Through extensive empirical analyses on both benchmark and private customer data, we demonstrate that our method produces synthetic text that is competitive in terms of utility with its non-private counterpart, meanwhile providing strong protection against potential privacy leakages.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting can dramatically improve the multi-step reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). CoT explicitly encourages the LLM to generate intermediate rationales for solving a problem, by providing a series of reasoning steps in the demonstrations. Despite its success, there is still little understanding of what makes CoT prompting effective and which aspects of the demonstrated reasoning steps contribute to its performance. In this paper, we show that CoT reasoning is possible even with invalid demonstrations - prompting with invalid reasoning steps can achieve over 80-90% of the performance obtained using CoT under various metrics, while still generating coherent lines of reasoning during inference. Further experiments show that other aspects of the rationales, such as being relevant to the query and correctly ordering the reasoning steps, are much more important for effective CoT reasoning. Overall, these findings both deepen our understanding of CoT prompting, and open up new questions regarding LLMs’ capability to learn to reason in context.

This paper studies a new task of federated learning (FL) for semantic parsing, where multiple clients collaboratively train one global model without sharing their semantic parsing data. By leveraging data from multiple clients, the FL paradigm can be especially beneficial for clients that have little training data to develop a data-hungry neural semantic parser on their own. We propose an evaluation setup to study this task, where we re-purpose widely-used single-domain text-to-SQL datasets as clients to form a realistic heterogeneous FL setting and collaboratively train a global model. As standard FL algorithms suffer from the high client heterogeneity in our realistic setup, we further propose a novel LOss Reduction Adjusted Re-weighting (Lorar) mechanism, which adjusts each client’s contribution to the global model update based on its training loss reduction during each round. Our intuition is that the larger the loss reduction, the further away the current global model is from the client’s local optimum, and the larger weight the client should get. By applying Lorar to three widely adopted FL algorithms (FedAvg, FedOPT and FedProx), we observe that their performance can be improved substantially on average (4%-20% absolute gain under MacroAvg) and that clients with smaller datasets enjoy larger performance gains. In addition, the global model converges faster for almost all the clients.

Despite recent progress in text-to-SQL parsing, current semantic parsers are still not accurate enough for practical use. In this paper, we investigate how to build automatic text-to-SQL error correction models. Noticing that token-level edits are out of context and sometimes ambiguous, we propose building clause-level edit models instead. Besides, while most language models of code are not specifically pre-trained for SQL, they know common data structures and their operations in programming languages such as Python. Thus, we propose a novel representation for SQL queries and their edits that adheres more closely to the pre-training corpora of language models of code. Our error correction model improves the exact set match accuracy of different parsers by 2.4-6.5 and obtains up to 4.3 point absolute improvement over two strong baselines.

As opposed to general English, many concepts in biomedical terminology have been designed in recent history by biomedical professionals with the goal of being precise and concise. This is often achieved by concatenating meaningful biomedical morphemes to create new semantic units. Nevertheless, most modern biomedical language models (LMs) are pre-trained using standard domain-specific tokenizers derived from large scale biomedical corpus statistics without explicitly leveraging the agglutinating nature of biomedical language. In this work, we first find that standard open-domain and biomedical tokenizers are largely unable to segment biomedical terms into meaningful components. Therefore, we hypothesize that using a tokenizer which segments biomedical terminology more accurately would enable biomedical LMs to improve their performance on downstream biomedical NLP tasks, especially ones which involve biomedical terms directly such as named entity recognition (NER) and entity linking. Surprisingly, we find that pre-training a biomedical LM using a more accurate biomedical tokenizer does not improve the entity representation quality of a language model as measured by several intrinsic and extrinsic measures such as masked language modeling prediction (MLM) accuracy as well as NER and entity linking performance. These quantitative findings, along with a case study which explores entity representation quality more directly, suggest that the biomedical pre-training process is quite robust to instances of sub-optimal tokenization.

A recent focus of large language model (LLM) development, as exemplified by generative search engines, is to incorporate external references to generate and support its claims. However, evaluating the attribution, i.e., verifying whether the generated statement is fully supported by the cited reference, remains an open problem. Although human evaluation is common practice, it is costly and time-consuming. In this paper, we investigate automatic evaluation of attribution given by LLMs. We begin by defining different types of attribution errors, and then explore two approaches for automatic evaluation: prompting LLMs and fine-tuning smaller LMs. The fine-tuning data is repurposed from related tasks such as question answering, fact-checking, natural language inference, and summarization. We manually curate a set of test examples covering 12 domains from a generative search engine, New Bing. Our results on this curated test set and simulated examples from existing benchmarks highlight both promising signals and challenges. We hope our problem formulation, testbeds, and findings will help lay the foundation for future studies on this important problem.

Despite remarkable progress in text-to-SQL semantic parsing in recent years, the performance of existing parsers is still far from perfect. Specifically, modern text-to-SQL parsers based on deep learning are often over-confident, thus casting doubt on their trustworthiness when deployed for real use. In this paper, we propose a parser-independent error detection model for text-to-SQL semantic parsing. Using a language model of code as its bedrock, we enhance our error detection model with graph neural networks that learn structural features of both natural language questions and SQL queries. We train our model on realistic parsing errors collected from a cross-domain setting, which leads to stronger generalization ability. Experiments with three strong text-to-SQL parsers featuring different decoding mechanisms show that our approach outperforms parser-dependent uncertainty metrics. Our model could also effectively improve the performance and usability of text-to-SQL semantic parsers regardless of their architectures.

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and GPT-4 have shown impressive performance in complex reasoning tasks. However, it is difficult to know whether the models are reasoning based on deep understandings of truth and logic, or leveraging their memorized patterns in a relatively superficial way. In this work, we explore testing LLMs’ reasoning by engaging with them in a debate-like conversation, where given a question, the LLM and the user need to discuss to make the correct decision starting from opposing arguments. Upon mitigating the Clever Hans effect, our task requires the LLM to not only achieve the correct answer on its own, but also be able to hold and defend its belief instead of blindly believing or getting misled by the user’s (invalid) arguments and critiques, thus testing in greater depth whether the LLM grasps the essence of the reasoning required to solve the problem. Across a range of complex reasoning benchmarks spanning math, commonsense, logic and BIG-Bench tasks, we find that despite their impressive performance as reported in existing work on generating correct step-by-step solutions in the beginning, LLMs like ChatGPT cannot maintain their beliefs in truth for a significant portion of examples when challenged by oftentimes absurdly invalid arguments. Our work points to danger zones of model alignment, and also suggests more careful treatments and interpretations of the recent findings that LLMs can improve their responses based on feedback.

We introduce TacoBot, a user-centered task-oriented digital assistant designed to guide users through complex real-world tasks with multiple steps. Covering a wide range of cooking and how-to tasks, we aim to deliver a collaborative and engaging dialogue experience. Equipped with language understanding, dialogue management, and response generation components supported by a robust search engine, TacoBot ensures efficient task assistance. To enhance the dialogue experience, we explore a series of data augmentation strategies using LLMs to train advanced neural models continuously. TacoBot builds upon our successful participation in the inaugural Alexa Prize TaskBot Challenge, where our team secured third place among ten competing teams. We offer TacoBot as an open-source framework that serves as a practical example for deploying task-oriented dialogue systems.

In-context learning with large language models (LLMs) has recently caught increasing attention due to its superior few-shot performance on various tasks. However, its performance on text-to-SQL parsing still has much room for improvement. In this paper, we hypothesize that a crucial aspect of LLMs to improve for text-to-SQL parsing is their multi-step reasoning ability. Thus, we systematically study how to enhance LLMs’ reasoning ability through chain of thought (CoT) style prompting, including the original chain-of-thought prompting and least-to-most prompting. Our experiments demonstrate that iterative prompting as in least-to-most prompting may be unnecessary for text-to-SQL parsing, and using detailed reasoning steps tends to have more error propagation issues. Based on these findings, we propose a new CoT-style prompting method for text-to-SQL parsing. It brings 5.2 and 6.5 point absolute gains on the Spider development set and the Spider Realistic set, respectively, compared to the standard prompting method without reasoning steps; 2.4 and 1.5 point absolute gains, compared to the least-to-most prompting method.

Synthesizing QA pairs with a question generator (QG) on the target domain has become a popular approach for domain adaptation of question answering (QA) models. Since synthetic questions are often noisy in practice, existing work adapts scores from a pretrained QA (or QG) model as criteria to select high-quality questions. However, these scores do not directly serve the ultimate goal of improving QA performance on the target domain. In this paper, we introduce a novel idea of training a question value estimator (QVE) that directly estimates the usefulness of synthetic questions for improving the target-domain QA performance. By conducting comprehensive experiments, we show that the synthetic questions selected by QVE can help achieve better target-domain QA performance, in comparison with existing techniques. We additionally show that by using such questions and only around 15% of the human annotations on the target domain, we can achieve comparable performance to the fully-supervised baselines.

While Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) internalize a great amount of world knowledge, they have been shown incapable of recalling these knowledge to solve tasks requiring complex & multi-step reasoning. Similar to how humans develop a “chain of thought” for these tasks, how can we equip PLMs with such abilities? In this work, we explore an iterative prompting framework, a new prompting paradigm which progressively elicits relevant knowledge from PLMs for multi-step inference. We identify key limitations of existing prompting methods, namely they are either restricted to queries with a single identifiable relation/predicate, or being agnostic to input contexts, which makes it difficult to capture variabilities across different inference steps. We propose an iterative context-aware prompter, which addresses these limitations by learning to dynamically synthesize prompts conditioned on the current step’s contexts. Experiments on three datasets involving multi-step reasoning show the effectiveness of the iterative scheme and the context-aware prompter design.

Existing studies on semantic parsing focus on mapping a natural-language utterance to a logical form (LF) in one turn. However, because natural language may contain ambiguity and variability, this is a difficult challenge. In this work, we investigate an interactive semantic parsing framework that explains the predicted LF step by step in natural language and enables the user to make corrections through natural-language feedback for individual steps. We focus on question answering over knowledge bases (KBQA) as an instantiation of our framework, aiming to increase the transparency of the parsing process and help the user trust the final answer. We construct INSPIRED, a crowdsourced dialogue dataset derived from the ComplexWebQuestions dataset. Our experiments show that this framework has the potential to greatly improve overall parse accuracy. Furthermore, we develop a pipeline for dialogue simulation to evaluate our framework w.r.t. a variety of state-of-the-art KBQA models without further crowdsourcing effort. The results demonstrate that our framework promises to be effective across such models.

Large pre-trained language models (PLMs) such as GPT-3 have shown strong in-context learning capabilities, which are highly appealing for domains such as biomedicine that feature high and diverse demands of language technologies but also high data annotation costs. In this paper, we present the first systematic and comprehensive study to compare the few-shot performance of GPT-3 in-context learning with fine-tuning smaller (i.e., BERT-sized) PLMs on two representative biomedical information extraction (IE) tasks: named entity recognition and relation extraction. We follow the true few-shot setting to avoid overestimating models’ few-shot performance by model selection over a large validation set. We also optimize GPT-3’s performance with known techniques such as contextual calibration and dynamic in-context example retrieval. However, our results show that GPT-3 still significantly underperforms compared to simply fine-tuning a smaller PLM. In addition, GPT-3 in-context learning also yields smaller gains in accuracy when more training data becomes available. More in-depth analyses further reveal issues of in-context learning that may be detrimental to IE tasks in general. Given the high cost of experimenting with GPT-3, we hope our study provides helpful guidance for biomedical researchers and practitioners towards more practical solutions such as fine-tuning small PLMs before better in-context learning is available for biomedical IE.

Multi-hop question answering (QA) combines multiple pieces of evidence to search for the correct answer. Reasoning over a text corpus (TextQA) and/or a knowledge base (KBQA) has been extensively studied and led to distinct system architectures. However, knowledge transfer between such two QA systems has been under-explored. Research questions like what knowledge is transferred or whether the transferred knowledge can help answer over one source using another one, are yet to be answered. In this paper, therefore, we study the knowledge transfer of multi-hop reasoning between structured and unstructured sources. We first propose a unified QA framework named SimultQA to enable knowledge transfer and bridge the distinct supervisions from KB and text sources. Then, we conduct extensive analyses to explore how knowledge is transferred by leveraging the pre-training and fine-tuning paradigm. We focus on the low-resource fine-tuning to show that pre-training SimultQA on one source can substantially improve its performance on the other source. More fine-grained analyses on transfer behaviors reveal the types of transferred knowledge and transfer patterns. We conclude with insights into how to construct better QA datasets and systems to exploit knowledge transfer for future work.

Learning to capture text-table alignment is essential for tasks like text-to-SQL. A model needs to correctly recognize natural language references to columns and values and to ground them in the given database schema. In this paper, we present a novel weakly supervised Structure-Grounded pretraining framework (STRUG) for text-to-SQL that can effectively learn to capture text-table alignment based on a parallel text-table corpus. We identify a set of novel pretraining tasks: column grounding, value grounding and column-value mapping, and leverage them to pretrain a text-table encoder. Additionally, to evaluate different methods under more realistic text-table alignment settings, we create a new evaluation set Spider-Realistic based on Spider dev set with explicit mentions of column names removed, and adopt eight existing text-to-SQL datasets for cross-database evaluation. STRUG brings significant improvement over BERTLARGE in all settings. Compared with existing pretraining methods such as GRAPPA, STRUG achieves similar performance on Spider, and outperforms all baselines on more realistic sets. All the code and data used in this work will be open-sourced to facilitate future research.

We present a large, challenging dataset, COUGH, for COVID-19 FAQ retrieval. Similar to a standard FAQ dataset, COUGH consists of three parts: FAQ Bank, Query Bank and Relevance Set. The FAQ Bank contains ~16K FAQ items scraped from 55 credible websites (e.g., CDC and WHO). For evaluation, we introduce Query Bank and Relevance Set, where the former contains 1,236 human-paraphrased queries while the latter contains ~32 human-annotated FAQ items for each query. We analyze COUGH by testing different FAQ retrieval models built on top of BM25 and BERT, among which the best model achieves 48.8 under P@5, indicating a great challenge presented by COUGH and encouraging future research for further improvement. Our COUGH dataset is available at https://github.com/sunlab-osu/covid-faq.

We present ReasonBert, a pre-training method that augments language models with the ability to reason over long-range relations and multiple, possibly hybrid contexts. Unlike existing pre-training methods that only harvest learning signals from local contexts of naturally occurring texts, we propose a generalized notion of distant supervision to automatically connect multiple pieces of text and tables to create pre-training examples that require long-range reasoning. Different types of reasoning are simulated, including intersecting multiple pieces of evidence, bridging from one piece of evidence to another, and detecting unanswerable cases. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation on a variety of extractive question answering datasets ranging from single-hop to multi-hop and from text-only to table-only to hybrid that require various reasoning capabilities and show that ReasonBert achieves remarkable improvement over an array of strong baselines. Few-shot experiments further demonstrate that our pre-training method substantially improves sample efficiency.

Machine reading comprehension has made great progress in recent years owing to large-scale annotated datasets. In the clinical domain, however, creating such datasets is quite difficult due to the domain expertise required for annotation. Recently, Pampari et al. (EMNLP’18) tackled this issue by using expert-annotated question templates and existing i2b2 annotations to create emrQA, the first large-scale dataset for question answering (QA) based on clinical notes. In this paper, we provide an in-depth analysis of this dataset and the clinical reading comprehension (CliniRC) task. From our qualitative analysis, we find that (i) emrQA answers are often incomplete, and (ii) emrQA questions are often answerable without using domain knowledge. From our quantitative experiments, surprising results include that (iii) using a small sampled subset (5%-20%), we can obtain roughly equal performance compared to the model trained on the entire dataset, (iv) this performance is close to human expert’s performance, and (v) BERT models do not beat the best performing base model. Following our analysis of the emrQA, we further explore two desired aspects of CliniRC systems: the ability to utilize clinical domain knowledge and to generalize to unseen questions and contexts. We argue that both should be considered when creating future datasets.

Nowadays, the interpretability of machine learning models is becoming increasingly important, especially in the medical domain. Aiming to shed some light on how to rationalize medical relation prediction, we present a new interpretable framework inspired by existing theories on how human memory works, e.g., theories of recall and recognition. Given the corpus-level statistics, i.e., a global co-occurrence graph of a clinical text corpus, to predict the relations between two entities, we first recall rich contexts associated with the target entities, and then recognize relational interactions between these contexts to form model rationales, which will contribute to the final prediction. We conduct experiments on a real-world public clinical dataset and show that our framework can not only achieve competitive predictive performance against a comprehensive list of neural baseline models, but also present rationales to justify its prediction. We further collaborate with medical experts deeply to verify the usefulness of our model rationales for clinical decision making.

Code retrieval is a key task aiming to match natural and programming languages. In this work, we propose adversarial learning for code retrieval, that is regularized by question-description relevance. First, we adapt a simple adversarial learning technique to generate difficult code snippets given the input question, which can help the learning of code retrieval that faces bi-modal and data-scarce challenges. Second, we propose to leverage question-description relevance to regularize adversarial learning, such that a generated code snippet should contribute more to the code retrieval training loss, only if its paired natural language description is predicted to be less relevant to the user given question. Experiments on large-scale code retrieval datasets of two programming languages show that our adversarial learning method is able to improve the performance of state-of-the-art models. Moreover, using an additional duplicated question detection model to regularize adversarial learning further improves the performance, and this is more effective than using the duplicated questions in strong multi-task learning baselines.

State-of-the-art question answering (QA) relies upon large amounts of training data for which labeling is time consuming and thus expensive. For this reason, customizing QA systems is challenging. As a remedy, we propose a novel framework for annotating QA datasets that entails learning a cost-effective annotation policy and a semi-supervised annotation scheme. The latter reduces the human effort: it leverages the underlying QA system to suggest potential candidate annotations. Human annotators then simply provide binary feedback on these candidates. Our system is designed such that past annotations continuously improve the future performance and thus overall annotation cost. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper to address the problem of annotating questions with minimal annotation cost. We compare our framework against traditional manual annotations in an extensive set of experiments. We find that our approach can reduce up to 21.1% of the annotation cost.

Despite the widely successful applications, bootstrapping and fine-tuning semantic parsers are still a tedious process with challenges such as costly data annotation and privacy risks. In this paper, we suggest an alternative, human-in-the-loop methodology for learning semantic parsers directly from users. A semantic parser should be introspective of its uncertainties and prompt for user demonstrations when uncertain. In doing so it also gets to imitate the user behavior and continue improving itself autonomously with the hope that eventually it may become as good as the user in interpreting their questions. To combat the sparsity of demonstrations, we propose a novel annotation-efficient imitation learning algorithm, which iteratively collects new datasets by mixing demonstrated states and confident predictions and retrains the semantic parser in a Dataset Aggregation fashion (Ross et al., 2011). We provide a theoretical analysis of its cost bound and also empirically demonstrate its promising performance on the text-to-SQL problem. Code will be available at https://github.com/sunlab-osu/MISP.

This paper investigates a new task named Conversational Question Generation (CQG) which is to generate a question based on a passage and a conversation history (i.e., previous turns of question-answer pairs). CQG is a crucial task for developing intelligent agents that can drive question-answering style conversations or test user understanding of a given passage. Towards that end, we propose a new approach named Reinforced Dynamic Reasoning network, which is based on the general encoder-decoder framework but incorporates a reasoning procedure in a dynamic manner to better understand what has been asked and what to ask next about the passage into the general encoder-decoder framework. To encourage producing meaningful questions, we leverage a popular question answering (QA) model to provide feedback and fine-tune the question generator using a reinforcement learning mechanism. Empirical results on the recently released CoQA dataset demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in comparison with various baselines and model variants. Moreover, to show the applicability of our method, we also apply it to create multi-turn question-answering conversations for passages in SQuAD.

Distant supervision (DS) has been widely used to automatically construct (noisy) labeled data for relation extraction (RE). Given two entities, distant supervision exploits sentences that directly mention them for predicting their semantic relation. We refer to this strategy as 1-hop DS, which unfortunately may not work well for long-tail entities with few supporting sentences. In this paper, we introduce a new strategy named 2-hop DS to enhance distantly supervised RE, based on the observation that there exist a large number of relational tables on the Web which contain entity pairs that share common relations. We refer to such entity pairs as anchors for each other, and collect all sentences that mention the anchor entity pairs of a given target entity pair to help relation prediction. We develop a new neural RE method REDS2 in the multi-instance learning paradigm, which adopts a hierarchical model structure to fuse information respectively from 1-hop DS and 2-hop DS. Extensive experimental results on a benchmark dataset show that REDS2 can consistently outperform various baselines across different settings by a substantial margin.

As a promising paradigm, interactive semantic parsing has shown to improve both semantic parsing accuracy and user confidence in the results. In this paper, we propose a new, unified formulation of the interactive semantic parsing problem, where the goal is to design a model-based intelligent agent. The agent maintains its own state as the current predicted semantic parse, decides whether and where human intervention is needed, and generates a clarification question in natural language. A key part of the agent is a world model: it takes a percept (either an initial question or subsequent feedback from the user) and transitions to a new state. We then propose a simple yet remarkably effective instantiation of our framework, demonstrated on two text-to-SQL datasets (WikiSQL and Spider) with different state-of-the-art base semantic parsers. Compared to an existing interactive semantic parsing approach that treats the base parser as a black box, our approach solicits less user feedback but yields higher run-time accuracy.

We study the problem of textual relation embedding with distant supervision. To combat the wrong labeling problem of distant supervision, we propose to embed textual relations with global statistics of relations, i.e., the co-occurrence statistics of textual and knowledge base relations collected from the entire corpus. This approach turns out to be more robust to the training noise introduced by distant supervision. On a popular relation extraction dataset, we show that the learned textual relation embedding can be used to augment existing relation extraction models and significantly improve their performance. Most remarkably, for the top 1,000 relational facts discovered by the best existing model, the precision can be improved from 83.9% to 89.3%.

Given a question and a set of answer candidates, answer triggering determines whether the candidate set contains any correct answers. If yes, it then outputs a correct one. In contrast to existing pipeline methods which first consider individual candidate answers separately and then make a prediction based on a threshold, we propose an end-to-end deep neural network framework, which is trained by a novel group-level objective function that directly optimizes the answer triggering performance. Our objective function penalizes three potential types of error and allows training the framework in an end-to-end manner. Experimental results on the WikiQA benchmark show that our framework outperforms the state of the arts by a 6.6% absolute gain under F1 measure.