How can we construct an automated debate judge to evaluate an extensive, vibrant, multi-turn debate? This task is challenging, as judging a debate involves grappling with lengthy texts, intricate argument relationships, and multi-dimensional assessments.At the same time, current research mainly focuses on short dialogues, rarely touching upon the evaluation of an entire debate.In this paper, by leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs), we propose Debatrix, which makes the analysis and assessment of multi-turn debates more aligned with majority preferences. Specifically, Debatrix features a vertical, iterative chronological analysis and a horizontal, multi-dimensional evaluation collaboration.To align with real-world debate scenarios, we introduced the PanelBench benchmark, comparing our system’s performance to actual debate outcomes.The findings indicate a notable enhancement over directly using LLMs for debate evaluation.Source code and benchmark data are available at https://github.com/ljcleo/debatrix.

Product review summarization aims to generate a concise summary based on product reviews to facilitate purchasing decisions. This intricate task gives rise to three challenges in existing work: factual accuracy, aspect comprehensiveness, and content relevance. In this paper, we first propose an FB-Thinker framework to improve the summarization ability of LLMs with multi-objective forward reasoning and multi-reward backward refinement. To enable LLM with these dual capabilities, we present two Chinese product review summarization datasets, Product-CSum and Product-CSum-Cross, for both instruction-tuning and cross-domain evaluation. Specifically, these datasets are collected via GPT-assisted manual annotations from an online forum and public datasets. We further design an evaluation mechanism Product-Eval, integrating both automatic and human evaluation across multiple dimensions for product summarization. Experimental results show the competitiveness and generalizability of our proposed framework in the product review summarization tasks.

Syllogistic reasoning, a typical form of deductive reasoning, is a critical capability widely required in natural language understanding tasks, such as text entailment and question answering. To better facilitate research on syllogistic reasoning, we develop a benchmark called SylloBase that differs from existing syllogistic datasets in three aspects: (1) Covering a complete taxonomy of syllogism reasoning patterns; (2) Containing both automatically and manually constructed samples; and (3) Involving both the generation and understanding tasks. We automatically construct 50k template-based syllogism samples by mining syllogism patterns from Wikidata and ConceptNet. To improve our dataset’s naturalness and challenge, we apply GPT-3 to paraphrase the template-based data and further manually rewrite 1,000 samples as the test set. State-of-the-art pre-trained language models can achieve the best generation ROUGE-L of 38.72 by T5 and the best multi-choice accuracy of 72.77% by RoBERTa on SylloBase, which indicates the great challenge of learning diverse syllogistic reasoning types on SylloBase. Our datasets are released at https://github.com/casually-PYlearner/SYLLOBASE.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), by incorporating external knowledge with parametric memory of language models, has become the state-of-the-art architecture for open-domain QA tasks. However, common knowledge bases are inherently constrained by limited coverage and noisy information, making retrieval-based approaches inadequate to answer implicit reasoning questions. In this paper, we propose an Induction-Augmented Generation (IAG) framework that utilizes inductive knowledge along with the retrieved documents for implicit reasoning. We leverage large language models (LLMs) for deriving such knowledge via a novel prompting method based on inductive reasoning patterns. On top of this, we implement two versions of IAG named IAG-GPT and IAG-Student, respectively. IAG-GPT directly utilizes the knowledge generated by GPT-3 for answer prediction, while IAG-Student gets rid of dependencies on GPT service at inference time by incorporating a student inductor model. The inductor is firstly trained via knowledge distillation and further optimized by back-propagating the generator feedback via differentiable beam scores. Experimental results show that IAG outperforms RAG baselines as well as ChatGPT on two Open-Domain QA tasks. Notably, our best models have won the first place in the official leaderboards of CSQA2.0 (since Nov 1, 2022) and StrategyQA (since Jan 8, 2023).

The knowledge graph is a structure to store and represent knowledge, and recent studies have discussed its capability to assist language models for various applications. Some variations of knowledge graphs aim to record arguments and their relations for computational argumentation tasks. However, many must simplify semantic types to fit specific schemas, thus losing flexibility and expression ability. In this paper, we propose the **Hi**erarchical **Ar**gumentation **G**raph (Hi-ArG), a new structure to organize arguments. We also introduce two approaches to exploit Hi-ArG, including a text-graph multi-modal model GreaseArG and a new pre-training framework augmented with graph information. Experiments on two argumentation tasks have shown that after further pre-training and fine-tuning, GreaseArG supersedes same-scale language models on these tasks, while incorporating graph information during further pre-training can also improve the performance of vanilla language models. Code for this paper is available at <https://github.com/ljcleo/Hi-ArG>.

Counter-argument generation—a captivating area in computational linguistics—seeks to craft statements that offer opposing views. While most research has ventured into paragraph-level generation, sentence-level counter-argument generation beckons with its unique constraints and brevity-focused challenges. Furthermore, the diverse nature of counter-arguments poses challenges for evaluating model performance solely based on n-gram-based metrics. In this paper, we present the ArgTersely benchmark for sentence-level counter-argument generation, drawing from a manually annotated dataset from the ChangeMyView debate forum. We also propose Arg-LlaMA for generating high-quality counter-argument. For better evaluation, we trained a BERT-based evaluator Arg-Judge with human preference data. We conducted comparative experiments involving various baselines such as LlaMA, Alpaca, GPT-3, and others. The results show the competitiveness of our proposed framework and evaluator in counter-argument generation tasks. Code and data are available at https://github.com/amazingljy1206/ArgTersely.

Generalized text representations are the foundation of many natural language understanding tasks. To fully utilize the different corpus, it is inevitable that models need to understand the relevance among them. However, many methods ignore the relevance and adopt a single-channel model (a coarse paradigm) directly for all tasks, which lacks enough rationality and interpretation. In addition, some existing works learn downstream tasks by stitches skill block (a fine paradigm), which might cause irrational results due to its redundancy and noise. In this work, we first analyze the task correlation through three different perspectives, , data property, manual design, and model-based relevance, based on which the similar tasks are grouped together. Then, we propose a hierarchical framework with a coarse-to-fine paradigm, with the bottom level shared to all the tasks, the mid-level divided to different groups, and the top-level assigned to each of the tasks. This allows our model to learn basic language properties from all tasks, boost performance on relevant tasks, and reduce the negative impact from irrelevant tasks. Our experiments on 13 benchmark datasets across five natural language understanding tasks demonstrate the superiority of our method.