Yining Lu

Yining Lu, Dixuan Wang, Tianjian Li et al.

As LLMs become increasingly prevalent, it is interesting to consider how ``creative'' these models can be. From cognitive science, creativity consists of at least two key characteristics: \emph{convergent} thinking (purposefulness to achieve a given goal) and \emph{divergent} thinking (adaptability to explore new environments or constraints) \citep{runco2003critical}. In this work, we introduce a framework for quantifying LLM creativity that incorporates the two design ingredients: (1) We introduce DENIAL PROMPTING which pushes LLMs to develop more creative solutions to a given problem by incrementally imposing new constraints on the previous solution, compelling LLMs to adopt new strategies. (2) We define NEOGAUGE, a metric that quantifies both convergent and divergent thinking in the generated creative responses by LLMs. We test the proposed framework on Codeforces problems, which serve as both a natural dataset for coding tasks and a collection of prior human solutions. We quantify NEOGAUGE for various proprietary and open-source models and find that even the most creative model, GPT-4, still falls short of demonstrating human-like creativity. We also experiment with advanced reasoning strategies (MCTS, self-correction, etc.) and observe no significant improvement in creativity. As a by-product of our analysis, we release NEOCODER dataset for reproducing our results on future models.

Yining Lu, Changjie Lu, Naina Bandyopadhyay et al.

Real-time bidding is the new paradigm of programmatic advertising. An advertiser wants to make the intelligent choice of utilizing a \textbf{Demand-Side Platform} to improve the performance of their ad campaigns. Existing approaches are struggling to provide a satisfactory solution for bidding optimization due to stochastic bidding behavior. In this paper, we proposed a multi-agent reinforcement learning architecture for RTB with functional optimization. We designed four agents bidding environment: three Lagrange-multiplier based functional optimization agents and one baseline agent (without any attribute of functional optimization) First, numerous attributes have been assigned to each agent, including biased or unbiased win probability, Lagrange multiplier, and click-through rate. In order to evaluate the proposed RTB strategy's performance, we demonstrate the results on ten sequential simulated auction campaigns. The results show that agents with functional actions and rewards had the most significant average winning rate and winning surplus, given biased and unbiased winning information respectively. The experimental evaluations show that our approach significantly improve the campaign's efficacy and profitability.

Yining Lu, Haoping Yu, Daniel Khashabi

Augmenting large language models (LLM) to use external tools enhances their performance across a variety of tasks. However, prior works over-rely on task-specific demonstration of tool use that limits their generalizability and computational cost due to making many calls to large-scale LLMs. We introduce GEAR, a computationally efficient query-tool grounding algorithm that is generalizable to various tasks that require tool use while not relying on task-specific demonstrations. GEAR achieves better efficiency by delegating tool grounding and execution to small language models (SLM) and LLM, respectively; while leveraging semantic and pattern-based evaluation at both question and answer levels for generalizable tool grounding. We evaluate GEAR on 14 datasets across 6 downstream tasks, demonstrating its strong generalizability to novel tasks, tools and different SLMs. Despite offering more efficiency, GEAR achieves higher precision in tool grounding compared to prior strategies using LLM prompting, thus improving downstream accuracy at a reduced computational cost. For example, we demonstrate that GEAR-augmented GPT-J and GPT-3 outperform counterpart tool-augmented baselines because of better tool use.

Yining Lu, Wenyi Tang, Max Johnson et al.

Existing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems typically use a centralized architecture, causing a high cost of data collection, integration, and management, as well as privacy concerns. There is a great need for a decentralized RAG system that enables foundation models to utilize information directly from data owners who maintain full control over their sources. However, decentralization brings a challenge: the numerous independent data sources vary significantly in reliability, which can diminish retrieval accuracy and response quality. To address this, our decentralized RAG system has a novel reliability scoring mechanism that dynamically evaluates each source based on the quality of responses it contributes to generate and prioritizes high-quality sources during retrieval. To ensure transparency and trust, the scoring process is securely managed through blockchain-based smart contracts, creating verifiable and tamper-proof reliability records without relying on a central authority. We evaluate our decentralized system with two Llama models (3B and 8B) in two simulated environments where six data sources have different levels of reliability. Our system achieves a +10.7\% performance improvement over its centralized counterpart in the real world-like unreliable data environments. Notably, it approaches the upper-bound performance of centralized systems under ideally reliable data environments. The decentralized infrastructure enables secure and trustworthy scoring management, achieving approximately 56\% marginal cost savings through batched update operations. Our code and system are open-sourced at github.com/yining610/Reliable-dRAG.

Xiao Ye, Andrew Wang, Jacob Choi et al.

Humans regularly engage in analogical thinking, relating personal experiences to current situations (X is analogous to Y because of Z). Analogical thinking allows humans to solve problems in creative ways, grasp difficult concepts, and articulate ideas more effectively. Can language models (LMs) do the same? To answer this question, we propose AnaloBench, a benchmark to determine analogical reasoning ability in LMs. Our benchmarking approach focuses on aspects of this ability that are common among humans: (i) recalling related experiences from a large amount of information, and (ii) applying analogical reasoning to complex and lengthy scenarios. We test a broad collection of proprietary models (e.g., GPT family, Claude V2) and open source models such as LLaMA2. As in prior results, scaling up LMs results in some performance boosts. Surprisingly, scale offers minimal gains when, (i) analogies involve lengthy scenarios, or (ii) recalling relevant scenarios from a large pool of information, a process analogous to finding a needle in a haystack. We hope these observations encourage further research in this field.

Yining Lu, Jingxi Qiu, Gaurav Gupta

Subjective answer evaluation is a time-consuming and tedious task, and the quality of the evaluation is heavily influenced by a variety of subjective personal characteristics. Instead, machine evaluation can effectively assist educators in saving time while also ensuring that evaluations are fair and realistic. However, most existing methods using regular machine learning and natural language processing techniques are generally hampered by a lack of annotated answers and poor model interpretability, making them unsuitable for real-world use. To solve these challenges, we propose ProtSi Network, a unique semi-supervised architecture that for the first time uses few-shot learning to subjective answer evaluation. To evaluate students' answers by similarity prototypes, ProtSi Network simulates the natural process of evaluator scoring answers by combining Siamese Network which consists of BERT and encoder layers with Prototypical Network. We employed an unsupervised diverse paraphrasing model ProtAugment, in order to prevent overfitting for effective few-shot text classification. By integrating contrastive learning, the discriminative text issue can be mitigated. Experiments on the Kaggle Short Scoring Dataset demonstrate that the ProtSi Network outperforms the most recent baseline models in terms of accuracy and quadratic weighted kappa.

Yining Lu, Meng Jiang

We study a persistent failure mode in multi-objective alignment for large language models (LLMs): training improves performance on only a subset of objectives while causing others to degrade. We formalize this phenomenon as cross-objective interference and conduct the first systematic study across classic scalarization algorithms, showing that interference is pervasive and exhibits strong model dependence. To explain this phenomenon, we derive a local covariance law showing that an objective improves at first order when its reward exhibits positive covariance with the scalarized score. We extend this analysis to clipped surrogate objectives used in modern alignment, demonstrating that the covariance law remains valid under mild conditions despite clipping. Building on this analysis, we propose Covariance Targeted Weight Adaptation (CTWA), a plug-and-play method that maintains positive covariance between objective rewards and the training signal to effectively mitigate cross-objective interference. Finally, we complement these local improvement conditions with a global convergence analysis under the Polyak--Łojasiewicz condition, establishing when non-convex scalarized optimization achieves global convergence and how cross-objective interference depends on specific model geometric properties.

Zhaoyi Joey Hou, Bowei Alvin Zhang, Yining Lu et al.

Creativity is often seen as a hallmark of human intelligence. While large language models (LLMs) are increasingly perceived as producing creative text, there is still no holistic framework to evaluate their creativity across diverse scenarios. Existing evaluation methods remain fragmented, with dramatic variation across domains and tasks, largely due to differing definitions and measurements of creativity. Inspired by the hypothesis that creativity is not one fixed idea, we propose CreativityPrism, an evaluation analysis framework that decomposes creativity into three dimensions: quality, novelty, and diversity. CreativityPrism incorporates nine tasks, three domains, i.e., divergent thinking, creative writing, and logical reasoning, and twenty evaluation metrics, which measure each dimension in task-specific, unique ways. We evaluate 17 state-of-the-art (SoTA) proprietary and open-sourced LLMs on CreativityPrism and analyze the performance correlations among different metrics and task domains. Our results reveal a notable gap between proprietary and open-source models. Overall, model performance tends to be highly correlated across tasks within the same domain and less so across different domains. Among evaluation dimensions, diversity and quality metrics show strong correlations - models that perform well on one often excel on the other - whereas novelty exhibits much weaker correlation with either. These findings support our hypothesis that strong performance in one creativity task or dimension does not necessarily generalize to others, underscoring the need for a holistic evaluation of LLM creativity.

Zhengping Jiang, Yining Lu, Hanjie Chen et al.

Free-text rationales play a pivotal role in explainable NLP, bridging the knowledge and reasoning gaps behind a model's decision-making. However, due to the diversity of potential reasoning paths and a corresponding lack of definitive ground truth, their evaluation remains a challenge. Existing evaluation metrics rely on the degree to which a rationale supports a target label, but we find these fall short in evaluating rationales that inadvertently leak the labels. To address this problem, we propose RORA, a Robust free-text Rationale evaluation against label leakage. RORA quantifies the new information supplied by a rationale to justify the label. This is achieved by assessing the conditional V-information \citep{hewitt-etal-2021-conditional} with a predictive family robust against leaky features that can be exploited by a small model. RORA consistently outperforms existing approaches in evaluating human-written, synthetic, or model-generated rationales, particularly demonstrating robustness against label leakage. We also show that RORA aligns well with human judgment, providing a more reliable and accurate measurement across diverse free-text rationales.

Yining Lu, Noah Ziems, Hy Dang et al.

Current research on the \textit{Decompose-Then-Verify} paradigm for evaluating the factuality of long-form text typically treats decomposition and verification in isolation, overlooking their interactions and potential misalignment. We find that existing decomposition policies, typically hand-crafted demonstrations, do not align well with downstream verifiers in terms of atomicity -- a novel metric quantifying information density -- leading to suboptimal verification results. We formulate finding the optimal decomposition policy for optimal verification as a bilevel optimization problem. To approximate a solution for this strongly NP-hard problem, we propose dynamic decomposition, a reinforcement learning framework that leverages verifier feedback to learn a policy for dynamically decomposing claims to verifier-preferred atomicity. Experimental results show that dynamic decomposition outperforms existing decomposition policies, improving verification confidence by 0.07 and accuracy by 0.12 (on a 0-1 scale) on average across varying verifiers, datasets, and atomcities of input claims.

Yining Lu, Zilong Wang, Shiyang Li et al.

Prior works in multi-objective reinforcement learning typically use linear reward scalarization with fixed weights, which provably fail to capture non-convex Pareto fronts and thus yield suboptimal results. This limitation becomes especially critical in online preference alignment for large language models. Here, stochastic trajectories generated by parameterized policies create highly non-linear and non-convex mappings from parameters to objectives that no single static weighting scheme can find optimal trade-offs. We address this limitation by introducing dynamic reward weighting, which adaptively adjusts reward weights during the online reinforcement learning process. Unlike existing approaches that rely on fixed-weight interpolation, our dynamic weighting continuously balances and prioritizes objectives in training, facilitating effective exploration of Pareto fronts in objective space. We introduce two approaches of increasing sophistication and generalizability: (1) hypervolume-guided weight adaptation and (2) gradient-based weight optimization, offering a versatile toolkit for online multi-objective alignment. Our extensive experiments demonstrate their compatibility with commonly used online reinforcement learning algorithms (including GRPO, REINFORCE, and RLOO), effectiveness across multiple mathematical reasoning datasets, and applicability to different model families, consistently achieving Pareto dominant solutions with fewer training steps than fixed-weight linear scalarization baselines.