Data annotation and synthesis generally refers to the labeling or generating of raw data with relevant information, which could be used for improving the efficacy of machine learning models. The process, however, is labor-intensive and costly. The emergence of advanced Large Language Models (LLMs), exemplified by GPT-4, presents an unprecedented opportunity to automate the complicated process of data annotation and synthesis. While existing surveys have extensively covered LLM architecture, training, and general applications, we uniquely focus on their specific utility for data annotation. This survey contributes to three core aspects: LLM-Based Annotation Generation, LLM-Generated Annotations Assessment, and LLM-Generated Annotations Utilization. Furthermore, this survey includes an in-depth taxonomy of data types that LLMs can annotate, a comprehensive review of learning strategies for models utilizing LLM-generated annotations, and a detailed discussion of the primary challenges and limitations associated with using LLMs for data annotation and synthesis. Serving as a key guide, this survey aims to assist researchers and practitioners in exploring the potential of the latest LLMs for data annotation, thereby fostering future advancements in this critical field.

Claim: This work is not advocating the use of LLMs for paper (meta-)reviewing. Instead, wepresent a comparative analysis to identify and distinguish LLM activities from human activities. Two research goals: i) Enable better recognition of instances when someone implicitly uses LLMs for reviewing activities; ii) Increase community awareness that LLMs, and AI in general, are currently inadequate for performing tasks that require a high level of expertise and nuanced judgment.This work is motivated by two key trends. On one hand, large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable versatility in various generative tasks such as writing, drawing, and question answering, significantly reducing the time required for many routine tasks. On the other hand, researchers, whose work is not only time-consuming but also highly expertise-demanding, face increasing challenges as they have to spend more time reading, writing, and reviewing papers. This raises the question: how can LLMs potentially assist researchers in alleviating their heavy workload?This study focuses on the topic of LLMs as NLP Researchers, particularly examining the effectiveness of LLMs in assisting paper (meta-)reviewing and its recognizability. To address this, we constructed the ReviewCritique dataset, which includes two types of information: (i) NLP papers (initial submissions rather than camera-ready) with both human-written and LLM-generated reviews, and (ii) each review comes with “deficiency” labels and corresponding explanations for individual segments, annotated by experts. Using ReviewCritique, this study explores two threads of research questions: (i) “LLMs as Reviewers”, how do reviews generated by LLMs compare with those written by humans in terms of quality and distinguishability? (ii) “LLMs as Metareviewers”, how effectively can LLMs identify potential issues, such as Deficient or unprofessional review segments, within individual paper reviews? To our knowledge, this is the first work to provide such a comprehensive analysis.

This study aims to address the pervasive challenge of quantifying uncertainty in large language models (LLMs) with black-box API access. Conformal Prediction (CP), known for its model-agnostic and distribution-free features, is a desired approach for various LLMs and data distributions. However, existing CP methods for LLMs typically assume access to the logits, which are unavailable for some API-only LLMs. In addition, logits are known to be miscalibrated, potentially leading to degraded CP performance. To tackle these challenges, we introduce a novel CP method that (1) is tailored for API-only LLMs without logit-access; (2) minimizes the size of prediction sets; and (3) ensures a statistical guarantee of the user-defined coverage. The core idea of this approach is to formulate nonconformity measures using both coarse-grained (i.e., sample frequency) and fine-grained uncertainty notions (e.g., semantic similarity). Experimental results on both close-ended and open-ended Question Answering tasks show our approach can mostly outperform the logit-based CP baselines.

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) in natural language generation (NLG) tasks remains an open challenge, exacerbated by the closed-source nature of the latest large language models (LLMs). This study investigates applying conformal prediction (CP), which can transform any heuristic uncertainty notion into rigorous prediction sets, to black-box LLMs in open-ended NLG tasks. We introduce a novel uncertainty measure based on self-consistency theory, and then develop a conformal uncertainty criterion by integrating the uncertainty condition aligned with correctness into the CP algorithm. Empirical evaluations indicate that our uncertainty measure outperforms prior state-of-the-art methods. Furthermore, we achieve strict control over the correctness coverage rate utilizing 7 popular LLMs on 4 free-form NLG datasets, spanning general-purpose and medical scenarios. Additionally, the calibrated prediction sets with small size further highlights the efficiency of our method in providing trustworthy guarantees for practical open-ended NLG applications.

The scaling of Large Language Models (LLMs) for retrieval-based tasks, particularly in Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG), faces significant memory constraints, especially when fine-tuning extensive prompt sequences. Current open-source libraries support full-model inference and fine-tuning across multiple GPUs but fall short of accommodating the efficient parameter distribution required for retrieved context. Addressing this gap, we introduce a novel framework for PEFT-compatible fine-tuning of GPT models, leveraging distributed training. Our framework uniquely utilizes JAX’s just-in-time (JIT) compilation and tensor-sharding for efficient resource management, thereby enabling accelerated fine-tuning with reduced memory requirements. This advancement significantly improves the scalability and feasibility of fine-tuning LLMs for complex RAG applications, even on systems with limited GPU resources. Our experiments show more than 12x improvement in runtime compared to Hugging Face/DeepSpeed implementation with four GPUs while consuming less than half the VRAM per GPU.

Detecting testimonial injustice is an essential element of addressing inequities and promoting inclusive healthcare practices, many of which are life-critical. However, using a single demographic factor to detect testimonial injustice does not fully encompass the nuanced identities that contribute to a patient’s experience. Further, some injustices may only be evident when examining the nuances that arise through the lens of intersectionality. Ignoring such injustices can result in poor quality of care or life-endangering events. Thus, considering intersectionality could result in more accurate classifications and just decisions. To illustrate this, we use real-world medical data to determine whether medical records exhibit words that could lead to testimonial injustice, employ fairness metrics (e.g. demographic parity, differential intersectional fairness, and subgroup fairness) to assess the severity to which subgroups are experiencing testimonial injustice, and analyze how the intersectionality of demographic features (e.g. gender and race) make a difference in uncovering testimonial injustice. From our analysis we found that with intersectionality we can better see disparities in how subgroups are treated and there are differences in how someone is treated based on the intersection of their demographic attributes. This has not been previously studied in clinical records, nor has it been proven through empirical study.

Debiasing word embeddings has been largely limited to individual and independent social categories. However, real-world corpora typically present multiple social categories that possibly correlate or intersect with each other. For instance, “hair weaves” is stereotypically associated with African American females, but neither African American nor females alone. Therefore, this work studies biases associated with multiple social categories: joint biases induced by the union of different categories and intersectional biases that do not overlap with the biases of the constituent categories. We first empirically observe that individual biases intersect non-trivially (i.e., over a one-dimensional subspace). Drawing from the intersectional theory in social science and the linguistic theory, we then construct an intersectional subspace to debias for multiple social categories using the nonlinear geometry of individual biases. Empirical evaluations corroborate the efficacy of our approach.

The element of repetition in cyberbullying behavior has directed recent computational studies toward detecting cyberbullying based on a social media session. In contrast to a single text, a session may consist of an initial post and an associated sequence of comments. Yet, emerging efforts to enhance the performance of session-based cyberbullying detection have largely overlooked unintended social biases in existing cyberbullying datasets. For example, a session containing certain demographic-identity terms (e.g., “gay” or “black”) is more likely to be classified as an instance of cyberbullying. In this paper, we first show evidence of such bias in models trained on sessions collected from different social media platforms (e.g., Instagram). We then propose a context-aware and model-agnostic debiasing strategy that leverages a reinforcement learning technique, without requiring any extra resources or annotations apart from a pre-defined set of sensitive triggers commonly used for identifying cyberbullying instances. Empirical evaluations show that the proposed strategy can simultaneously alleviate the impacts of the unintended biases and improve the detection performance.