From ice cream flavors to climate change, people exhibit a wide array of opinions on various topics, and understanding the rationale for these opinions can promote healthy discussion and consensus among them. As such, it can be valuable for a large language model (LLM), particularly as an AI assistant, to be able to empathize with or even explain these various standpoints. In this work, we hypothesize that different topic stances often manifest correlations that can be used to extrapolate to topics with unknown opinions. We explore various prompting and fine-tuning methods to improve an LLM’s ability to (a) extrapolate from opinions on known topics to unknown ones and (b) support their extrapolation with reasoning. Our findings suggest that LLMs possess inherent knowledge from training data about these opinion correlations, and with minimal data, the similarities between human opinions and model-extrapolated opinions can be improved by more than 50%. Furthermore, LLM can generate the reasoning process behind their extrapolation of opinions.

Autonomous planning has been an ongoing pursuit since the inception of artificial intelligence. Based on curated problem solvers, early planning agents could deliver precise solutions for specific tasks but lacked generalization. The emergence of large language models (LLMs) and their powerful reasoning capabilities has reignited interest in autonomous planning by automatically generating reasonable solutions for given tasks. However, prior research and our experiments show that current language agents still lack human-level planning abilities. Even the state-of-the-art reasoning model, OpenAI o1, achieves only 15.6% on one of the complex real-world planning benchmarks. This highlights a critical question: What hinders language agents from achieving human-level planning? Although existing studies have highlighted weak performance in agent planning, the deeper underlying issues and the mechanisms and limitations of the strategies proposed to address them remain insufficiently understood. In this work, we apply the feature attribution study and identify two key factors that hinder agent planning: the limited role of constraints and the diminishing influence of questions. We also find that although current strategies help mitigate these challenges, they do not fully resolve them, indicating that agents still have a long way to go before reaching human-level intelligence.

Sampling is a basic operation for large language models (LLMs). In reinforcement learning rollouts and meta generation algorithms such as Best-of-N, it is essential to sample correct trajectories within a given compute budget. To find an optimal allocation for sample compute budgets, several choices need to be made:Which sampling configurations (model, temperature, language, etc.) to use?How many samples to generate in each configuration?We formulate these choices as a learning problem and propose OSCA, an algorithm that Optimizes Sample Compute Allocation by finding an optimal mix of different inference configurations.Our experiments show that with our learned mixed allocation, we can achieve accuracy better than the best single configuration with 128x less compute on code generation and 25x less compute on 4 reasoning tasks.is also shown to be effective in agentic workflows beyond single-turn tasks, achieving a better accuracy on SWE-Bench with 3x less compute than the default configuration.Our code and generations are released at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/OSCA.

How can large language models (LLMs) process and translate endangered languages? Many languages lack a large corpus to train a decent LLM; therefore existing LLMs rarely perform well in unseen, endangered languages. On the contrary, we observe that 2000 endangered languages, though without a large corpus, have a grammar book or a dictionary. We propose LingoLLM, a training-free approach to enable an LLM to process unseen languages that hardly occur in its pre-training. Our key insight is to demonstrate linguistic knowledge of an unseen language in an LLM’s prompt, including a dictionary, a grammar book, and morphologically analyzed input text. We implement LingoLLM on top of two models, GPT-4 and Mixtral, and evaluate their performance on 5 tasks across 8 endangered or low-resource languages. Our results show that LingoLLM elevates translation capability from GPT-4’s 0 to 10.5 BLEU for 10 language directions. Our findings demonstrate the tremendous value of linguistic knowledge in the age of LLMs for endangered languages. Our data, code, and model generations will be released to the public. Our data, code, and model generations can be found at https://github.com/LLiLab/llm4endangeredlang.

While a large body of literature suggests that large language models (LLMs) acquire rich linguistic representations, little is known about whether they adapt to linguistic biases in a human-like way. The present study probes this question by asking whether LLMs display human-like referential biases using stimuli and procedures from real psycholinguistic experiments. Recent psycholinguistic studies suggest that humans adapt their referential biases with recent exposure to referential patterns; closely replicating three relevant psycholinguistic experiments from Johnson & Arnold (2022) in an in-context learning (ICL) framework, we found that InstructGPT adapts its pronominal interpretations in response to the frequency of referential patterns in the local discourse, though in a limited fashion: adaptation was only observed relative to syntactic but not semantic biases. By contrast, FLAN-UL2 fails to generate meaningful patterns. Our results provide further evidence that contemporary LLMs discourse representations are sensitive to syntactic patterns in the local context but less so to semantic patterns. Our data and code are available at https://github.com/zkx06111/llm_priming.

Automatic email to-do item generation is the task of generating to-do items from a given email to help people overview emails and schedule daily work. Different from prior research on email summarization, to-do item generation focuses on generating action mentions to provide more structured summaries of email text. Prior work either requires large amount of annotation for key sentences with potential actions or fails to pay attention to nuanced actions from these unstructured emails, and thus often lead to unfaithful summaries. To fill these gaps, we propose a simple and effective learning to highlight and summarize framework (LHS) to learn to identify the most salient text and actions, and incorporate these structured representations to generate more faithful to-do items. Experiments show that our LHS model outperforms the baselines and achieves the state-of-the-art performance in terms of both quantitative evaluation and human judgement. We also discussed specific challenges that current models faced with email to-do summarization.

It is difficult for non-autoregressive translation (NAT) models to capture the multi-modal distribution of target translations due to their conditional independence assumption, which is known as the “multi-modality problem”, including the lexical multi-modality and the syntactic multi-modality. While the first one has been well studied, the syntactic multi-modality brings severe challenges to the standard cross entropy (XE) loss in NAT and is understudied. In this paper, we conduct a systematic study on the syntactic multi-modality problem. Specifically, we decompose it into short- and long-range syntactic multi-modalities and evaluate several recent NAT algorithms with advanced loss functions on both carefully designed synthesized datasets and real datasets. We find that the Connectionist Temporal Classification (CTC) loss and the Order-Agnostic Cross Entropy (OAXE) loss can better handle short- and long-range syntactic multi-modalities respectively. Furthermore, we take the best of both and design a new loss function to better handle the complicated syntactic multi-modality in real-world datasets. To facilitate practical usage, we provide a guide to using different loss functions for different kinds of syntactic multi-modality.