By allowing models to predict without task-specific training, in-context learning (ICL) with pretrained LLMs has enormous potential in NLP. However, a number of problems persist in ICL. In particular, its performance is sensitive to the choice and order of in-context examples. Given the same set of in-context examples with different orderings, model performance may vary from near random to near state-of-the-art. In this work, we formulate in-context example ordering as an optimization problem. We examine three problem settings that differ in the assumptions they make about what is known about the task. Inspired by the idea of learning from label proportions, we propose two principles for in-context example ordering guided by model’s probability predictions. We apply our proposed principles to thirteen text classification datasets and nine different autoregressive LLMs with 700M to 13B parameters. We demonstrate that our approach outperforms the baselines by improving the classification accuracy, reducing model miscalibration, and also by selecting better in-context examples.

Empathy is critical for effective and satisfactory conversational communication. Prior efforts to measure conversational empathy mostly focus on expressed communicative intents—that is, the way empathy is expressed. Yet, these works ignore the fact that conversation is also a collaboration involving both speakers and listeners. In contrast, we propose a multi-dimensional empathy evaluation framework to measure both expressed intents from the speaker’s perspective and perceived empathy from the listener’s perspective. We apply our analytical framework to examine internal customer-service dialogues. We find the two dimensions (expressed intent types and perceived empathy) are interconnected, while perceived empathy has high correlations with dialogue satisfaction levels.To reduce the annotation cost, we explore different options to automatically measure conversational empathy: prompting LLMs and training language model-based classifiers. Our experiments show that prompting methods with even popular models like GPT-4 and Flan family models perform relatively poorly on both public and our internal datasets. In contrast, instruction-finetuned classifiers based on FlanT5 family models outperform prior works and competitive baselines. We conduct a detailed ablation study to give more insights into instruction finetuning method’s strong performance.

Increasingly, model compression techniques enable large language models (LLMs) to be deployed in real-world applications. As a result of this momentum towards local deployment, compressed LLMs will interact with a large population. Prior work on compression typically prioritize preserving perplexity, which is directly analogous to training loss. The impact of compression method on other critical aspects of model behavior—particularly safety—requires systematic assessment. To this end, we investigate the impact of model compression along four dimensions: (1) degeneration harm, i.e., bias and toxicity in generation; (2) representational harm, i.e., biases in discriminative tasks; (3) dialect bias; and (4) language modeling and downstream task performance. We examine a wide spectrum of LLM compression techniques, including unstructured pruning, semi-structured pruning, and quantization. Our analysis reveals that compression can lead to unexpected consequences. Although compression may unintentionally alleviate LLMs’ degeneration harm, it can still exacerbate representational harm. Furthermore, increasing compression produces a divergent impact on different protected groups. Finally, different compression methods have drastically different safety impacts: for example, quantization mostly preserves bias while pruning degrades quickly. Our findings underscore the importance of integrating safety assessments into the development of compressed LLMs to ensure their reliability across real-world applications.