Search for: All records

While general argument retrieval systems have significantly matured, multilingual argument retrieval in a socio-cultural setting is an overlooked problem. Advancements in such systems are imperative to enhance the inclusivity of society. The Perspective Argument Retrieval (PAR) task addresses these aspects and acknowledges their potential latent influence on argumentation. Here, we present a multilingual retrieval system for PAR that accounts for societal diversity during retrieval. Our approach couples a retriever and a re-ranker and spans multiple languages, thus factoring in diverse socio-cultural settings. The performance of our end-to-end system on three distinct test sets testify to its robustness. 

Representing discourse as argument graphs facilitates robust analysis. Although computational frameworks for constructing graphs from monologues exist, there is a lack of frameworks for parsing dialogue. Inference Anchoring Theory (IAT) is a theoretical framework for extracting graphical argument structures and relationships from dialogues. Here, we introduce computational models for implementing the IAT framework for parsing dialogues. We experiment with a classification-based biaffine parser and Large Language Model (LLM)-based generative methods and compare them. Our results demonstrate the utility of finetuning LLMs for constructing IAT-based argument graphs from dialogues, which is a nuanced task. 

Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant progress in integrating safety and knowledge alignment. However, adversarial actors can manipulate these models into generating unsafe responses, and excessive safety alignment can lead to unintended hallucinations. To address these challenges, we introduce UniWiz, a novel 2-step data orchestration framework that unifies safety and knowledge data generation. We propose a “safety-priming” method to generate synthetic safety data and overcome safety bottlenecks. We also inject relevant knowledge into conversations by retrieving factual information from curated sources. UniWiz dataset consists of 17,638 quality-controlled conversations and 10,000 augmented preference data. Pretrained models fine-tuned on UniWiz show improvements across various metrics and outperform state-of-the-art instruction-tuned models trained on much larger datasets. 

Hallucinations in large language models (LLMs), where they generate fluent but factually incorrect outputs, pose challenges for applications requiring strict truthfulness. This work proposes a multi-faceted approach to detect such hallucinations across various language tasks. We leverage automatic data annotation using a proprietary LLM, fine-tuning of the Mistral-7B-instruct-v0.2 model on annotated and benchmark data, role-based and rationale-based prompting strategies, and an ensemble method combining different model outputs through majority voting. This comprehensive framework aims to improve the robustness and reliability of hallucination detection for LLM generations. Code and data1 1 Introduction The modern natural language generation (NLG) (OpenAI et al., 2023; Touvron et al., 2023) landscape faces two interconnected challenges: firstly, current neural models have a tendency to produce f luent yet inaccurate outputs, and secondly, our evaluation metrics are better suited for assessing f luency rather than correctness(Bang et al., 2023; Guerreiro et al., 2023). This phenomenon, known as "hallucination," (Ji et al., 2023) where neural networks generate plausible-sounding but factually incorrect outputs, is a significant hurdle, especially for NLG applications that require strict adherence to correctness. For instance, in machine translation(Lee et al., 2019), producing a fluent translation that deviates from the source text’s meaning renders the entire translation pipeline unreliable. This issue may arise as LLMs are trained on vast amounts of data from the internet, which can contain inaccuracies, biases, and false information. Also, it may arise due improper representations learned during training even if good quality data is 1https://github.com/souvikdgp16/shroom_compos_mentis used. As a result, LLMs can sometimes hallucinate or fabricate details, especially when prompted to discuss topics outside their training data or make inferences beyond their capabilities. Hallucination detection (Liu et al., 2022), also known as factual verification or truthfulness evaluation, identifies and mitigates these hallucinations in the outputs of LLMs. This is an active area of research and development, as it is crucial for ensuring the reliability and trustworthiness of LLMgenerated content, particularly in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, finance, and legal applications. In this task, the primary focus will be to classify whether a generation is hallucinated. This work proposes a multi-faceted approach to detecting hallucinations in large language models. 

State-of-the-art conversational AI systems raise concerns due to their potential risks of generating unsafe, toxic, unethical, or dangerous content. Previous works have developed datasets to teach conversational agents the appropriate social paradigms to respond effectively to specifically designed hazardous content. However, models trained on these adversarial datasets still struggle to recognize subtle unsafe situations that appear naturally in conversations or introduce an inappropriate response in a casual context. To understand the extent of this problem, we study prosociality in both adversarial and casual dialog contexts and audit the response quality of general-purpose language models in terms of propensity to produce unsafe content. We propose a dual-step fine-tuning process to address these issues using a socially aware n-pair contrastive loss. Subsequently, we train a base model that integrates prosocial behavior by leveraging datasets like Moral Integrity Corpus (MIC) and ProsocialDialog. Experimental results on several dialog datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in generating socially appropriate responses. 

Hateful comments are prevalent on social media platforms. Although tools for automatically detecting, flagging, and blocking such false, offensive, and harmful content online have lately matured, such reactive and brute force methods alone provide short-term and superficial remedies while the perpetrators persist. With the public availability of large language models which can generate articulate synthetic and engaging content at scale, there are concerns about the rapid growth of dissemination of such malicious content on the web. There is now a need to focus on deeper, long-term solutions that involve engaging with the human perpetrator behind the source of the content to change their viewpoint or at least bring down the rhetoric using persuasive means. To do that, we propose defining and experimenting with controllable strategies for generating counterarguments to hateful comments in online conversations. We experiment with controlling response generation using features based on (i) argument structure and reasoning-based Walton argument schemes, (ii) counter-argument speech acts, and (iii) human characteristicsbased qualities such as Big-5 personality traits and human values. Using automatic and human evaluations, we determine the best combination of features that generate fluent, argumentative, and logically sound arguments for countering hate. We further share the developed computational models for automatically annotating text with such features, and a silver-standard annotated version of an existing hate speech dialog corpora. 

The subtle human values we acquire through life experiences govern our thoughts and gets reflected in our speech. It plays an integral part in capturing the essence of our individuality and making it imperative to identify such values in computational systems that mimic human actions. Computational argumentation is a field that deals with the argumentation capabilities of humans and can benefit from identifying such values. Motivated by that, we present an ensemble approach for detecting human values from argument text. Our ensemble comprises three models: (i) An entailment-based model for determining the human values based on their descriptions, (ii) A Roberta-based classifier that predicts the set of human values from an argument. (iii) A Roberta-based classifier to predict a reduced set of human values from an argument. We experiment with different ways of combining the models and report our results. Furthermore, our best combination achieves an overall F1 score of 0.48 on the main test set. 

Effective argumentation is essential towards a purposeful conversation with a satisfactory outcome. For example, persuading someone to reconsider smoking might involve empathetic, well founded arguments based on facts and expert opinions about its ill-effects and the consequences on one’s family. However, the automatic generation of high-quality factual arguments can be challenging. Addressing existing controllability issues can make the recent advances in computational models for argument generation a potential solution. In this paper, we introduce ArgU: a neural argument generator capable of producing factual arguments from input facts and real-world concepts that can be explicitly controlled for stance and argument structure using Walton’s argument scheme-based control codes. Unfortunately, computational argument generation is a relatively new field and lacks datasets conducive to training. Hence, we have compiled and released an annotated corpora of 69,428 arguments spanning six topics and six argument schemes, making it the largest publicly available corpus for identifying argument schemes; the paper details our annotation and dataset creation framework. We further experiment with an argument generation strategy that establishes an inference strategy by generating an “argument template” before actual argument generation. Our results demonstrate that it is possible to automatically generate diverse arguments exhibiting different inference patterns for the same set of facts by using control codes based on argument schemes and stance. 

Knowledge Graph(KG) grounded conversations often use large pre-trained models and usually suffer from fact hallucination. Frequently entities with no references in knowledge sources and conversation history are introduced into responses, thus hindering the flow of the conversation—existing work attempt to overcome this issue by tweaking the training procedure or using a multi-step refining method. However, minimal effort is put into constructing an entity-level hallucination detection system, which would provide fine-grained signals that control fallacious content while generating responses. As a first step to address this issue, we dive deep to identify various modes of hallucination in KG-grounded chatbots through human feedback analysis. Secondly, we propose a series of perturbation strategies to create a synthetic dataset named FADE (FActual Dialogue Hallucination DEtection Dataset). Finally, we conduct comprehensive data analyses and create multiple baseline models for hallucination detection to compare against human-verified data and already established benchmarks. 

Generative neural conversational systems are typically trained by minimizing the entropy loss between the training “hard” targets and the predicted logits. Performance gains and improved generalization are often achieved by employing regularization techniques like label smoothing, which converts the training “hard” targets to soft targets. However, label smoothing enforces a data independent uniform distribution on the incorrect training targets, leading to a false assumption of equiprobability. In this paper, we propose and experiment with incorporating data-dependent word similarity-based weighing methods to transform the uniform distribution of the incorrect target probabilities in label smoothing to a more realistic distribution based on semantics. We introduce hyperparameters to control the incorrect target distribution and report significant performance gains over networks trained using standard label smoothing-based loss on two standard open-domain dialogue corpora.