Causal inference is one of the hallmarks of human intelligence. While the field of CausalNLP has attracted much interest in the recent years, existing causal inference datasets in NLP primarily rely on discovering causality from empirical knowledge (e.g., commonsense knowledge). In this work, we propose the first benchmark dataset to test the pure causal inference skills of large language models (LLMs). Specifically, we formulate a novel task Corr2Cause, which takes a set of correlational statements and determines the causal relationship between the variables. We curate a large-scale dataset of more than 200K samples, on which we evaluate seventeen existing LLMs. Through our experiments, we identify a key shortcoming of LLMs in terms of their causal inference skills, and show that these models achieve almost close to random performance on the task. This shortcoming is somewhat mitigated when we try to re-purpose LLMs for this skill via finetuning, but we find that these models still fail to generalize -- they can only perform causal inference in in-distribution settings when variable names and textual expressions used in the queries are similar to those in the training set, but fail in out-of-distribution settings generated by perturbing these queries. Corr2Cause is a challenging task for LLMs, and would be helpful in guiding future research on improving LLMs' pure reasoning skills and generalizability. Our data is at https://huggingface.co/datasets/causalnlp/corr2cause. Our code is at https://github.com/causalNLP/corr2cause.
Zhiheng Lyu, Zhijing Jin, Fernando Gonzalez et al.
Sentiment analysis (SA) aims to identify the sentiment expressed in a text, such as a product review. Given a review and the sentiment associated with it, this work formulates SA as a combination of two tasks: (1) a causal discovery task that distinguishes whether a review "primes" the sentiment (Causal Hypothesis C1), or the sentiment "primes" the review (Causal Hypothesis C2); and (2) the traditional prediction task to model the sentiment using the review as input. Using the peak-end rule in psychology, we classify a sample as C1 if its overall sentiment score approximates an average of all the sentence-level sentiments in the review, and C2 if the overall sentiment score approximates an average of the peak and end sentiments. For the prediction task, we use the discovered causal mechanisms behind the samples to improve LLM performance by proposing causal prompts that give the models an inductive bias of the underlying causal graph, leading to substantial improvements by up to 32.13 F1 points on zero-shot five-class SA. Our code is at https://github.com/cogito233/causal-sa
Utkarsh Pratiush, Austin Houston, Kamyar Barakati et al.
Microscopy is a primary source of information on materials structure and functionality at nanometer and atomic scales. The data generated is often well-structured, enriched with metadata and sample histories, though not always consistent in detail or format. The adoption of Data Management Plans (DMPs) by major funding agencies promotes preservation and access. However, deriving insights remains difficult due to the lack of standardized code ecosystems, benchmarks, and integration strategies. As a result, data usage is inefficient and analysis time is extensive. In addition to post-acquisition analysis, new APIs from major microscope manufacturers enable real-time, ML-based analytics for automated decision-making and ML-agent-controlled microscope operation. Yet, a gap remains between the ML and microscopy communities, limiting the impact of these methods on physics, materials discovery, and optimization. Hackathons help bridge this divide by fostering collaboration between ML researchers and microscopy experts. They encourage the development of novel solutions that apply ML to microscopy, while preparing a future workforce for instrumentation, materials science, and applied ML. This hackathon produced benchmark datasets and digital twins of microscopes to support community growth and standardized workflows. All related code is available at GitHub: https://github.com/KalininGroup/Mic-hackathon-2024-codes-publication/tree/1.0.0.1
While several previous studies have analyzed gender bias in research, we are still missing a comprehensive analysis of gender differences in the AI community, covering diverse topics and different development trends. Using the AI Scholar dataset of 78K researchers in the field of AI, we identify several gender differences: (1) Although female researchers tend to have fewer overall citations than males, this citation difference does not hold for all academic-age groups; (2) There exist large gender homophily in co-authorship on AI papers; (3) Female first-authored papers show distinct linguistic styles, such as longer text, more positive emotion words, and more catchy titles than male first-authored papers. Our analysis provides a window into the current demographic trends in our AI community, and encourages more gender equality and diversity in the future. Our code and data are at https://github.com/causalNLP/ai-scholar-gender.
NLP datasets are richer than just input-output pairs; rather, they carry causal relations between the input and output variables. In this work, we take sentiment classification as an example and look into the causal relations between the review (X) and sentiment (Y). As psychology studies show that language can affect emotion, different psychological processes are evoked when a person first makes a rating and then self-rationalizes their feeling in a review (where the sentiment causes the review, i.e., Y -> X), versus first describes their experience, and weighs the pros and cons to give a final rating (where the review causes the sentiment, i.e., X -> Y ). Furthermore, it is also a completely different psychological process if an annotator infers the original rating of the user by theory of mind (ToM) (where the review causes the rating, i.e., X -ToM-> Y ). In this paper, we verbalize these three causal mechanisms of human psychological processes of sentiment classification into three different causal prompts, and study (1) how differently they perform, and (2) what nature of sentiment classification data leads to agreement or diversity in the model responses elicited by the prompts. We suggest future work raise awareness of different causal structures in NLP tasks. Our code and data are at https://github.com/cogito233/psych-causal-prompt
Zhijing Jin, Abhinav Lalwani, Tejas Vaidhya et al.
Reasoning is central to human intelligence. However, fallacious arguments are common, and some exacerbate problems such as spreading misinformation about climate change. In this paper, we propose the task of logical fallacy detection, and provide a new dataset (Logic) of logical fallacies generally found in text, together with an additional challenge set for detecting logical fallacies in climate change claims (LogicClimate). Detecting logical fallacies is a hard problem as the model must understand the underlying logical structure of the argument. We find that existing pretrained large language models perform poorly on this task. In contrast, we show that a simple structure-aware classifier outperforms the best language model by 5.46% on Logic and 4.51% on LogicClimate. We encourage future work to explore this task as (a) it can serve as a new reasoning challenge for language models, and (b) it can have potential applications in tackling the spread of misinformation. Our dataset and code are available at https://github.com/causalNLP/logical-fallacy
Efficiently solving real-world problems with LLMs increasingly hinges on their ability to interact with dynamic web environments and autonomously acquire external information. While recent research like Search-R1 and WebDancer demonstrates strong performance in solving web tasks, they heavily rely on additional tools to convert the interactive web environment into static text content. This is in contrast to human browsing behaviors, which involve diverse interactions with the browser, such as scrolling, clicking, and typing. In this paper, we propose BrowserAgent, a more interactive agent that solves complex tasks through human-inspired browser actions. BrowserAgent operates directly on raw web pages via Playwright through a set of predefined browser actions. We adopt a two-stage training (Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Rejection Fine-Tuning (RFT)) to improve the model's generalization abilities. Despite using significantly less training data than Search-R1, BrowserAgent achieves more competitive results across different Open-QA tasks. Additionally, we introduce an explicit memory mechanism to store key conclusions across steps, further enhancing the model's reasoning capabilities for long-horizon tasks. Notably, BrowserAgent-7B can achieve around 20\% improvement over Search-R1 on multi-hop QA tasks like HotpotQA, 2Wiki, and Bamboogle. These results indicate that BrowserAgent can serve as a more advanced framework for more interactive and scalable web agents.