Musashi Hinck


2024

pdf bib
AutoPersuade: A Framework for Evaluating and Explaining Persuasive Arguments
Till Saenger | Musashi Hinck | Justin Grimmer | Brandon Stewart
Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing

We introduce a three-part framework for constructing persuasive messages, AutoPersuade. First, we curate a large collection of arguments and gather human evaluations of their persuasiveness. Next, we introduce a novel topic model to identify the features of these arguments that influence persuasion. Finally, we use the model to predict the persuasiveness of new arguments and to assess the causal effects of argument components, offering an explanation of the results. We demonstrate the effectiveness of AutoPersuade in an experimental study on arguments for veganism, validating our findings through human studies and out-of-sample predictions.

pdf bib
Why do LLaVA Vision-Language Models Reply to Images in English?
Musashi Hinck | Carolin Holtermann | Matthew Olson | Florian Schneider | Sungduk Yu | Anahita Bhiwandiwalla | Anne Lauscher | Shao-Yen Tseng | Vasudev Lal
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024

We uncover a surprising multilingual bias occurring in a popular class of multimodal vision-language models (VLMs). Including an image in the query to a LLaVA-style VLM significantly increases the likelihood of the model returning an English response, regardless of the language of the query. This paper investigates the causes of this loss with a two-pronged approach that combines extensive ablation of the design space with a mechanistic analysis of the models’ internal representations of image and text inputs. Both approaches indicate that the issue stems in the language modeling component of the LLaVA model. Statistically, we find that switching the language backbone for a bilingual language model has the strongest effect on reducing this error. Mechanistically, we provide compelling evidence that visual inputs are not mapped to a similar space as text ones, and that intervening on intermediary attention layers can reduce this bias. Our findings provide important insights to researchers and engineers seeking to understand the crossover between multimodal and multilingual spaces, and contribute to the goal of developing capable and inclusive VLMs for non-English contexts.

pdf bib
Political Compass or Spinning Arrow? Towards More Meaningful Evaluations for Values and Opinions in Large Language Models
Paul Röttger | Valentin Hofmann | Valentina Pyatkin | Musashi Hinck | Hannah Kirk | Hinrich Schuetze | Dirk Hovy
Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Much recent work seeks to evaluate values and opinions in large language models (LLMs) using multiple-choice surveys and questionnaires. Most of this work is motivated by concerns around real-world LLM applications. For example, politically-biased LLMs may subtly influence society when they are used by millions of people. Such real-world concerns, however, stand in stark contrast to the artificiality of current evaluations: real users do not typically ask LLMs survey questions. Motivated by this discrepancy, we challenge the prevailing *constrained* evaluation paradigm for values and opinions in LLMs and explore more realistic *unconstrained* evaluations. As a case study, we focus on the popular Political Compass Test (PCT). In a systematic review, we find that most prior work using the PCT *forces models to comply with the PCT’s multiple-choice format. We show that models give substantively different answers when not forced; that answers change depending on how models are forced; and that answers lack paraphrase robustness. Then, we demonstrate that models give different answers yet again in a more realistic open-ended answer setting. We distill these findings into recommendations and open challenges in evaluating values and opinions in LLMs.