Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

James Zou

Publications and source records attributed to James Zou.

At least 217 records · Page 12Linked to original sources
arXiv2024

Can AI Be as Creative as Humans?

Creativity serves as a cornerstone for societal progress and innovation. With the rise of advanced generative AI models capable of tasks once reserved for human creativity, the study of AI's creative potential becomes imperative for its responsible development and application. In this paper, we prove in theory that AI can be as creative as humans under the condition that it can properly fit the data generated by human creators. Therefore, the debate on AI's creativity is reduced into the question of its ability to fit a sufficient amount of data. To arrive at this conclusion, this paper first addresses the complexities in defining creativity by introducing a new concept called Relative Creativity. Rather than attempting to define creativity universally, we shift the focus to whether AI can match the creative abilities of a hypothetical human. The methodological shift leads to a statistically quantifiable assessment of AI's creativity, term Statistical Creativity. This concept, statistically comparing the creative abilities of AI with those of specific human groups, facilitates theoretical exploration of AI's creative potential. Our analysis reveals that by fitting extensive conditional data without marginalizing out the generative conditions, AI can emerge as a hypothetical new creator. The creator possesses the same creative abilities on par with the human creators it was trained on. Building on theoretical findings, we discuss the application in prompt-conditioned autoregressive models, providing a practical means for evaluating creative abilities of generative AI models, such as Large Language Models (LLMs). Additionally, this study provides an actionable training guideline, bridging the theoretical quantification of creativity with practical model training.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2024

Navigating Dataset Documentations in AI: A Large-Scale Analysis of Dataset Cards on Hugging Face

Advances in machine learning are closely tied to the creation of datasets. While data documentation is widely recognized as essential to the reliability, reproducibility, and transparency of ML, we lack a systematic empirical understanding of current dataset documentation practices. To shed light on this question, here we take Hugging Face -- one of the largest platforms for sharing and collaborating on ML models and datasets -- as a prominent case study. By analyzing all 7,433 dataset documentation on Hugging Face, our investigation provides an overview of the Hugging Face dataset ecosystem and insights into dataset documentation practices, yielding 5 main findings: (1) The dataset card completion rate shows marked heterogeneity correlated with dataset popularity. (2) A granular examination of each section within the dataset card reveals that the practitioners seem to prioritize Dataset Description and Dataset Structure sections, while the Considerations for Using the Data section receives the lowest proportion of content. (3) By analyzing the subsections within each section and utilizing topic modeling to identify key topics, we uncover what is discussed in each section, and underscore significant themes encompassing both technical and social impacts, as well as limitations within the Considerations for Using the Data section. (4) Our findings also highlight the need for improved accessibility and reproducibility of datasets in the Usage sections. (5) In addition, our human annotation evaluation emphasizes the pivotal role of comprehensive dataset content in shaping individuals' perceptions of a dataset card's overall quality. Overall, our study offers a unique perspective on analyzing dataset documentation through large-scale data science analysis and underlines the need for more thorough dataset documentation in machine learning research.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

The Power of Contrast for Feature Learning: A Theoretical Analysis

Contrastive learning has achieved state-of-the-art performance in various self-supervised learning tasks and even outperforms its supervised counterpart. Despite its empirical success, theoretical understanding of the superiority of contrastive learning is still limited. In this paper, under linear representation settings, (i) we provably show that contrastive learning outperforms the standard autoencoders and generative adversarial networks, two classical generative unsupervised learning methods, for both feature recovery and in-domain downstream tasks; (ii) we also illustrate the impact of labeled data in supervised contrastive learning. This provides theoretical support for recent findings that contrastive learning with labels improves the performance of learned representations in the in-domain downstream task, but it can harm the performance in transfer learning. We verify our theory with numerical experiments.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Zoology: Measuring and Improving Recall in Efficient Language Models

Attention-free language models that combine gating and convolutions are growing in popularity due to their efficiency and increasingly competitive performance. To better understand these architectures, we pretrain a suite of 17 attention and "gated-convolution" language models, finding that SoTA gated-convolution architectures still underperform attention by up to 2.1 perplexity points on the Pile. In fine-grained analysis, we find 82% of the gap is explained by each model's ability to recall information that is previously mentioned in-context, e.g. "Hakuna Matata means no worries Hakuna Matata it means no" $\rightarrow$ "??". On this task, termed "associative recall", we find that attention outperforms gated-convolutions by a large margin: a 70M parameter attention model outperforms a 1.4 billion parameter gated-convolution model on associative recall. This is surprising because prior work shows gated convolutions can perfectly solve synthetic tests for AR capability. To close the gap between synthetics and real language, we develop a new formalization of the task called multi-query associative recall (MQAR) that better reflects actual language. We perform an empirical and theoretical study of MQAR that elucidates differences in the parameter-efficiency of attention and gated-convolution recall. Informed by our analysis, we evaluate simple convolution-attention hybrids and show that hybrids with input-dependent sparse attention patterns can close 97.4% of the gap to attention, while maintaining sub-quadratic scaling. Our code is accessible at: https://github.com/HazyResearch/zoology.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2023

TWIGMA: A dataset of AI-Generated Images with Metadata From Twitter

Recent progress in generative artificial intelligence (gen-AI) has enabled the generation of photo-realistic and artistically-inspiring photos at a single click, catering to millions of users online. To explore how people use gen-AI models such as DALLE and StableDiffusion, it is critical to understand the themes, contents, and variations present in the AI-generated photos. In this work, we introduce TWIGMA (TWItter Generative-ai images with MetadatA), a comprehensive dataset encompassing over 800,000 gen-AI images collected from Jan 2021 to March 2023 on Twitter, with associated metadata (e.g., tweet text, creation date, number of likes), available at https://zenodo.org/records/8031785. Through a comparative analysis of TWIGMA with natural images and human artwork, we find that gen-AI images possess distinctive characteristics and exhibit, on average, lower variability when compared to their non-gen-AI counterparts. Additionally, we find that the similarity between a gen-AI image and natural images is inversely correlated with the number of likes. Finally, we observe a longitudinal shift in the themes of AI-generated images on Twitter, with users increasingly sharing artistically sophisticated content such as intricate human portraits, whereas their interest in simple subjects such as natural scenes and animals has decreased. Our findings underscore the significance of TWIGMA as a unique data resource for studying AI-generated images.

stat.AP↗
arXiv2023

New Evaluation Metrics Capture Quality Degradation due to LLM Watermarking

With the increasing use of large-language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, watermarking has emerged as a promising approach for tracing machine-generated content. However, research on LLM watermarking often relies on simple perplexity or diversity-based measures to assess the quality of watermarked text, which can mask important limitations in watermarking. Here we introduce two new easy-to-use methods for evaluating watermarking algorithms for LLMs: 1) evaluation by LLM-judger with specific guidelines; and 2) binary classification on text embeddings to distinguish between watermarked and unwatermarked text. We apply these methods to characterize the effectiveness of current watermarking techniques. Our experiments, conducted across various datasets, reveal that current watermarking methods are detectable by even simple classifiers, challenging the notion of watermarking subtlety. We also found, through the LLM judger, that watermarking impacts text quality, especially in degrading the coherence and depth of the response. Our findings underscore the trade-off between watermark robustness and text quality and highlight the importance of having more informative metrics to assess watermarking quality.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2023

Data Acquisition: A New Frontier in Data-centric AI

As Machine Learning (ML) systems continue to grow, the demand for relevant and comprehensive datasets becomes imperative. There is limited study on the challenges of data acquisition due to ad-hoc processes and lack of consistent methodologies. We first present an investigation of current data marketplaces, revealing lack of platforms offering detailed information about datasets, transparent pricing, standardized data formats. With the objective of inciting participation from the data-centric AI community, we then introduce the DAM challenge, a benchmark to model the interaction between the data providers and acquirers. The benchmark was released as a part of DataPerf. Our evaluation of the submitted strategies underlines the need for effective data acquisition strategies in ML.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2023

ChatGPT Exhibits Gender and Racial Biases in Acute Coronary Syndrome Management

Recent breakthroughs in large language models (LLMs) have led to their rapid dissemination and widespread use. One early application has been to medicine, where LLMs have been investigated to streamline clinical workflows and facilitate clinical analysis and decision-making. However, a leading barrier to the deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and in particular LLMs has been concern for embedded gender and racial biases. Here, we evaluate whether a leading LLM, ChatGPT 3.5, exhibits gender and racial bias in clinical management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We find that specifying patients as female, African American, or Hispanic resulted in a decrease in guideline recommended medical management, diagnosis, and symptom management of ACS. Most notably, the largest disparities were seen in the recommendation of coronary angiography or stress testing for the diagnosis and further intervention of ACS and recommendation of high intensity statins. These disparities correlate with biases that have been observed clinically and have been implicated in the differential gender and racial morbidity and mortality outcomes of ACS and coronary artery disease. Furthermore, we find that the largest disparities are seen during unstable angina, where fewer explicit clinical guidelines exist. Finally, we find that through asking ChatGPT 3.5 to explain its reasoning prior to providing an answer, we are able to improve clinical accuracy and mitigate instances of gender and racial biases. This is among the first studies to demonstrate that the gender and racial biases that LLMs exhibit do in fact affect clinical management. Additionally, we demonstrate that existing strategies that improve LLM performance not only improve LLM performance in clinical management, but can also be used to mitigate gender and racial biases.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2023

Holistic Analysis of Hallucination in GPT-4V(ision): Bias and Interference Challenges

While GPT-4V(ision) impressively models both visual and textual information simultaneously, it's hallucination behavior has not been systematically assessed. To bridge this gap, we introduce a new benchmark, namely, the Bias and Interference Challenges in Visual Language Models (Bingo). This benchmark is designed to evaluate and shed light on the two common types of hallucinations in visual language models: bias and interference. Here, bias refers to the model's tendency to hallucinate certain types of responses, possibly due to imbalance in its training data. Interference pertains to scenarios where the judgment of GPT-4V(ision) can be disrupted due to how the text prompt is phrased or how the input image is presented. We identify a notable regional bias, whereby GPT-4V(ision) is better at interpreting Western images or images with English writing compared to images from other countries or containing text in other languages. Moreover, GPT-4V(ision) is vulnerable to leading questions and is often confused when interpreting multiple images together. Popular mitigation approaches, such as self-correction and chain-of-thought reasoning, are not effective in resolving these challenges. We also identified similar biases and interference vulnerabilities with LLaVA and Bard. Our results characterize the hallucination challenges in GPT-4V(ision) and state-of-the-art visual-language models, and highlight the need for new solutions. The Bingo benchmark is available at https://github.com/gzcch/Bingo.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

How is ChatGPT's behavior changing over time?

GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 are the two most widely used large language model (LLM) services. However, when and how these models are updated over time is opaque. Here, we evaluate the March 2023 and June 2023 versions of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on several diverse tasks: 1) math problems, 2) sensitive/dangerous questions, 3) opinion surveys, 4) multi-hop knowledge-intensive questions, 5) generating code, 6) US Medical License tests, and 7) visual reasoning. We find that the performance and behavior of both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 can vary greatly over time. For example, GPT-4 (March 2023) was reasonable at identifying prime vs. composite numbers (84% accuracy) but GPT-4 (June 2023) was poor on these same questions (51% accuracy). This is partly explained by a drop in GPT-4's amenity to follow chain-of-thought prompting. Interestingly, GPT-3.5 was much better in June than in March in this task. GPT-4 became less willing to answer sensitive questions and opinion survey questions in June than in March. GPT-4 performed better at multi-hop questions in June than in March, while GPT-3.5's performance dropped on this task. Both GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 had more formatting mistakes in code generation in June than in March. We provide evidence that GPT-4's ability to follow user instructions has decreased over time, which is one common factor behind the many behavior drifts. Overall, our findings show that the behavior of the "same" LLM service can change substantially in a relatively short amount of time, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of LLMs.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2023

Beyond Confidence: Reliable Models Should Also Consider Atypicality

While most machine learning models can provide confidence in their predictions, confidence is insufficient to understand a prediction's reliability. For instance, the model may have a low confidence prediction if the input is not well-represented in the training dataset or if the input is inherently ambiguous. In this work, we investigate the relationship between how atypical(rare) a sample or a class is and the reliability of a model's predictions. We first demonstrate that atypicality is strongly related to miscalibration and accuracy. In particular, we empirically show that predictions for atypical inputs or atypical classes are more overconfident and have lower accuracy. Using these insights, we show incorporating atypicality improves uncertainty quantification and model performance for discriminative neural networks and large language models. In a case study, we show that using atypicality improves the performance of a skin lesion classifier across different skin tone groups without having access to the group attributes. Overall, we propose that models should use not only confidence but also atypicality to improve uncertainty quantification and performance. Our results demonstrate that simple post-hoc atypicality estimators can provide significant value.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Factorized Contrastive Learning: Going Beyond Multi-view Redundancy

In a wide range of multimodal tasks, contrastive learning has become a particularly appealing approach since it can successfully learn representations from abundant unlabeled data with only pairing information (e.g., image-caption or video-audio pairs). Underpinning these approaches is the assumption of multi-view redundancy - that shared information between modalities is necessary and sufficient for downstream tasks. However, in many real-world settings, task-relevant information is also contained in modality-unique regions: information that is only present in one modality but still relevant to the task. How can we learn self-supervised multimodal representations to capture both shared and unique information relevant to downstream tasks? This paper proposes FactorCL, a new multimodal representation learning method to go beyond multi-view redundancy. FactorCL is built from three new contributions: (1) factorizing task-relevant information into shared and unique representations, (2) capturing task-relevant information via maximizing MI lower bounds and removing task-irrelevant information via minimizing MI upper bounds, and (3) multimodal data augmentations to approximate task relevance without labels. On large-scale real-world datasets, FactorCL captures both shared and unique information and achieves state-of-the-art results on six benchmarks

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

DataPerf: Benchmarks for Data-Centric AI Development

Machine learning research has long focused on models rather than datasets, and prominent datasets are used for common ML tasks without regard to the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of the underlying problems. Neglecting the fundamental importance of data has given rise to inaccuracy, bias, and fragility in real-world applications, and research is hindered by saturation across existing dataset benchmarks. In response, we present DataPerf, a community-led benchmark suite for evaluating ML datasets and data-centric algorithms. We aim to foster innovation in data-centric AI through competition, comparability, and reproducibility. We enable the ML community to iterate on datasets, instead of just architectures, and we provide an open, online platform with multiple rounds of challenges to support this iterative development. The first iteration of DataPerf contains five benchmarks covering a wide spectrum of data-centric techniques, tasks, and modalities in vision, speech, acquisition, debugging, and diffusion prompting, and we support hosting new contributed benchmarks from the community. The benchmarks, online evaluation platform, and baseline implementations are open source, and the MLCommons Association will maintain DataPerf to ensure long-term benefits to academia and industry.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

OpenDataVal: a Unified Benchmark for Data Valuation

Assessing the quality and impact of individual data points is critical for improving model performance and mitigating undesirable biases within the training dataset. Several data valuation algorithms have been proposed to quantify data quality, however, there lacks a systemic and standardized benchmarking system for data valuation. In this paper, we introduce OpenDataVal, an easy-to-use and unified benchmark framework that empowers researchers and practitioners to apply and compare various data valuation algorithms. OpenDataVal provides an integrated environment that includes (i) a diverse collection of image, natural language, and tabular datasets, (ii) implementations of eleven different state-of-the-art data valuation algorithms, and (iii) a prediction model API that can import any models in scikit-learn. Furthermore, we propose four downstream machine learning tasks for evaluating the quality of data values. We perform benchmarking analysis using OpenDataVal, quantifying and comparing the efficacy of state-of-the-art data valuation approaches. We find that no single algorithm performs uniformly best across all tasks, and an appropriate algorithm should be employed for a user's downstream task. OpenDataVal is publicly available at https://opendataval.github.io with comprehensive documentation. Furthermore, we provide a leaderboard where researchers can evaluate the effectiveness of their own data valuation algorithms.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Can large language models provide useful feedback on research papers? A large-scale empirical analysis

Expert feedback lays the foundation of rigorous research. However, the rapid growth of scholarly production and intricate knowledge specialization challenge the conventional scientific feedback mechanisms. High-quality peer reviews are increasingly difficult to obtain. Researchers who are more junior or from under-resourced settings have especially hard times getting timely feedback. With the breakthrough of large language models (LLM) such as GPT-4, there is growing interest in using LLMs to generate scientific feedback on research manuscripts. However, the utility of LLM-generated feedback has not been systematically studied. To address this gap, we created an automated pipeline using GPT-4 to provide comments on the full PDFs of scientific papers. We evaluated the quality of GPT-4's feedback through two large-scale studies. We first quantitatively compared GPT-4's generated feedback with human peer reviewer feedback in 15 Nature family journals (3,096 papers in total) and the ICLR machine learning conference (1,709 papers). The overlap in the points raised by GPT-4 and by human reviewers (average overlap 30.85% for Nature journals, 39.23% for ICLR) is comparable to the overlap between two human reviewers (average overlap 28.58% for Nature journals, 35.25% for ICLR). The overlap between GPT-4 and human reviewers is larger for the weaker papers. We then conducted a prospective user study with 308 researchers from 110 US institutions in the field of AI and computational biology to understand how researchers perceive feedback generated by our GPT-4 system on their own papers. Overall, more than half (57.4%) of the users found GPT-4 generated feedback helpful/very helpful and 82.4% found it more beneficial than feedback from at least some human reviewers. While our findings show that LLM-generated feedback can help researchers, we also identify several limitations.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Large language models in medicine: the potentials and pitfalls

Large language models (LLMs) have been applied to tasks in healthcare, ranging from medical exam questions to responding to patient questions. With increasing institutional partnerships between companies producing LLMs and healthcare systems, real world clinical application is coming closer to reality. As these models gain traction, it is essential for healthcare practitioners to understand what LLMs are, their development, their current and potential applications, and the associated pitfalls when utilized in medicine. This review and accompanying tutorial aim to give an overview of these topics to aid healthcare practitioners in understanding the rapidly changing landscape of LLMs as applied to medicine.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2023

Last-Layer Fairness Fine-tuning is Simple and Effective for Neural Networks

As machine learning has been deployed ubiquitously across applications in modern data science, algorithmic fairness has become a great concern. Among them, imposing fairness constraints during learning, i.e. in-processing fair training, has been a popular type of training method because they don't require accessing sensitive attributes during test time in contrast to post-processing methods. While this has been extensively studied in classical machine learning models, their impact on deep neural networks remains unclear. Recent research has shown that adding fairness constraints to the objective function leads to severe over-fitting to fairness criteria in large models, and how to solve this challenge is an important open question. To tackle this, we leverage the wisdom and power of pre-training and fine-tuning and develop a simple but novel framework to train fair neural networks in an efficient and inexpensive way -- last-layer fine-tuning alone can effectively promote fairness in deep neural networks. This framework offers valuable insights into representation learning for training fair neural networks.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers

The rapid adoption of generative language models has brought about substantial advancements in digital communication, while simultaneously raising concerns regarding the potential misuse of AI-generated content. Although numerous detection methods have been proposed to differentiate between AI and human-generated content, the fairness and robustness of these detectors remain underexplored. In this study, we evaluate the performance of several widely-used GPT detectors using writing samples from native and non-native English writers. Our findings reveal that these detectors consistently misclassify non-native English writing samples as AI-generated, whereas native writing samples are accurately identified. Furthermore, we demonstrate that simple prompting strategies can not only mitigate this bias but also effectively bypass GPT detectors, suggesting that GPT detectors may unintentionally penalize writers with constrained linguistic expressions. Our results call for a broader conversation about the ethical implications of deploying ChatGPT content detectors and caution against their use in evaluative or educational settings, particularly when they may inadvertently penalize or exclude non-native English speakers from the global discourse. The published version of this study can be accessed at: www.cell.com/patterns/fulltext/S2666-3899(23)00130-7

cs.CL↗