Renze Lou

Kexun Zhang, Weiran Yao, Zuxin Liu et al. · cmu

Large language model (LLM) agents have shown great potential in solving real-world software engineering (SWE) problems. The most advanced open-source SWE agent can resolve over 27% of real GitHub issues in SWE-Bench Lite. However, these sophisticated agent frameworks exhibit varying strengths, excelling in certain tasks while underperforming in others. To fully harness the diversity of these agents, we propose DEI (Diversity Empowered Intelligence), a framework that leverages their unique expertise. DEI functions as a meta-module atop existing SWE agent frameworks, managing agent collectives for enhanced problem-solving. Experimental results show that a DEI-guided committee of agents is able to surpass the best individual agent's performance by a large margin. For instance, a group of open-source SWE agents, with a maximum individual resolve rate of 27.3% on SWE-Bench Lite, can achieve a 34.3% resolve rate with DEI, making a 25% improvement and beating most closed-source solutions. Our best-performing group excels with a 55% resolve rate, securing the highest ranking on SWE-Bench Lite. Our findings contribute to the growing body of research on collaborative AI systems and their potential to solve complex software engineering challenges.

Yutong Wang, Renze Lou, Kai Zhang et al.

Open relation extraction (OpenRE) is the task of extracting relation schemes from open-domain corpora. Most existing OpenRE methods either do not fully benefit from high-quality labeled corpora or can not learn semantic representation directly, affecting downstream clustering efficiency. To address these problems, in this work, we propose a novel learning framework named MORE (Metric learning-based Open Relation Extraction). The framework utilizes deep metric learning to obtain rich supervision signals from labeled data and drive the neural model to learn semantic relational representation directly. Experiments result in two real-world datasets show that our method outperforms other state-of-the-art baselines. Our source code is available on Github.

Renze Lou, Wenpeng Yin

This work proposes a challenging yet more realistic setting for zero-shot cross-task generalization: zero-shot instruction following, presuming the existence of a paragraph-style task definition while no demonstrations exist. To better learn the task supervision from the definition, we propose two strategies: first, to automatically find out the critical sentences in the definition; second, a ranking objective to force the model to generate the gold outputs with higher probabilities when those critical parts are highlighted in the definition. The joint efforts of the two strategies yield state-of-the-art performance on the Super-NaturalInstructions. Our code is available on GitHub.

Xiaojie Gu, Renze Lou, Lin Sun et al.

Conversational Causal Emotion Entailment (C2E2) is a task that aims at recognizing the causes corresponding to a target emotion in a conversation. The order of utterances in the conversation affects the causal inference. However, most current position encoding strategies ignore the order relation among utterances and speakers. To address the issue, we devise a novel position-aware graph to encode the entire conversation, fully modeling causal relations among utterances. The comprehensive experiments show that our method consistently achieves state-of-the-art performance on two challenging test sets, proving the effectiveness of our model. Our source code is available on Github: https://github.com/XiaojieGu/PAGE.

Renze Lou, Kai Zhang, Wenpeng Yin

Task semantics can be expressed by a set of input-output examples or a piece of textual instruction. Conventional machine learning approaches for natural language processing (NLP) mainly rely on the availability of large-scale sets of task-specific examples. Two issues arise: first, collecting task-specific labeled examples does not apply to scenarios where tasks may be too complicated or costly to annotate, or the system is required to handle a new task immediately; second, this is not user-friendly since end-users are probably more willing to provide task description rather than a set of examples before using the system. Therefore, the community is paying increasing interest in a new supervision-seeking paradigm for NLP: learning to follow task instructions, i.e., instruction following. Despite its impressive progress, there are some common issues that the community struggles with. This survey paper tries to summarize and provide insights to the current research on instruction following, particularly, by answering the following questions: (i) What is task instruction, and what instruction types exist? (ii) How to model instructions? (iii) What are popular instruction following datasets and evaluation metrics? (iv) What factors influence and explain the instructions' performance? (v) What challenges remain in instruction following? To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive survey about instruction following.

Ryo Kamoi, Sarkar Snigdha Sarathi Das, Renze Lou et al.

With Large Language Models (LLMs) being widely used across various tasks, detecting errors in their responses is increasingly crucial. However, little research has been conducted on error detection of LLM responses. Collecting error annotations on LLM responses is challenging due to the subjective nature of many NLP tasks, and thus previous research focuses on tasks of little practical value (e.g., word sorting) or limited error types (e.g., faithfulness in summarization). This work introduces ReaLMistake, the first error detection benchmark consisting of objective, realistic, and diverse errors made by LLMs. ReaLMistake contains three challenging and meaningful tasks that introduce objectively assessable errors in four categories (reasoning correctness, instruction-following, context-faithfulness, and parameterized knowledge), eliciting naturally observed and diverse errors in responses of GPT-4 and Llama 2 70B annotated by experts. We use ReaLMistake to evaluate error detectors based on 12 LLMs. Our findings show: 1) Top LLMs like GPT-4 and Claude 3 detect errors made by LLMs at very low recall, and all LLM-based error detectors perform much worse than humans. 2) Explanations by LLM-based error detectors lack reliability. 3) LLMs-based error detection is sensitive to small changes in prompts but remains challenging to improve. 4) Popular approaches to improving LLMs, including self-consistency and majority vote, do not improve the error detection performance. Our benchmark and code are provided at https://github.com/psunlpgroup/ReaLMistake.

Lin Sun, Kai Zhang, Qingyuan Li et al.

Multimodal information extraction (MIE) gains significant attention as the popularity of multimedia content increases. However, current MIE methods often resort to using task-specific model structures, which results in limited generalizability across tasks and underutilizes shared knowledge across MIE tasks. To address these issues, we propose UMIE, a unified multimodal information extractor to unify three MIE tasks as a generation problem using instruction tuning, being able to effectively extract both textual and visual mentions. Extensive experiments show that our single UMIE outperforms various state-of-the-art (SoTA) methods across six MIE datasets on three tasks. Furthermore, in-depth analysis demonstrates UMIE's strong generalization in the zero-shot setting, robustness to instruction variants, and interpretability. Our research serves as an initial step towards a unified MIE model and initiates the exploration into both instruction tuning and large language models within the MIE domain. Our code, data, and model are available at https://github.com/ZUCC-AI/UMIE

Jihyun Janice Ahn, Ryo Kamoi, Berk Atil et al.

LLMs often generate seemingly valid answers to flawed or ill-posed inputs. This is not due to missing knowledge: under discriminative prompting, the same models can mostly identify such issues, yet fail to reflect this in standard generative responses. This reveals a fundamental know-act gap between discriminative recognition and generative behavior. Prior work largely characterizes this issue in narrow settings, such as math word problems or question answering, with limited focus on how to integrate these two modes. In this work, we present a comprehensive analysis using FaultyScience, a newly constructed large-scale, cross-disciplinary benchmark of faulty scientific questions. We show that the gap is pervasive and stems from token-level autoregression, which entangles task selection (validate vs. answer) with content generation, preventing discriminative knowledge from being utilized. To address this, we propose DeIllusionLLM, a task-level autoregressive framework that explicitly models this decision. Through self-distillation, the model unifies discriminative judgment and generative reasoning within a single backbone. Empirically, DeIllusionLLM substantially reduces answer-despite-error failures under natural prompting while maintaining general reasoning performance, demonstrating that self-distillation is an effective and scalable solution for bridging the discriminative-generative know-act gap

Renze Lou, Hanzi Xu, Sijia Wang et al.

Numerous studies have assessed the proficiency of AI systems, particularly large language models (LLMs), in facilitating everyday tasks such as email writing, question answering, and creative content generation. However, researchers face unique challenges and opportunities in leveraging LLMs for their own work, such as brainstorming research ideas, designing experiments, and writing or reviewing papers. In this study, we introduce AAAR-1.0, a benchmark dataset designed to evaluate LLM performance in three fundamental, expertise-intensive research tasks: (i) EquationInference, assessing the correctness of equations based on the contextual information in paper submissions; (ii) ExperimentDesign, designing experiments to validate research ideas and solutions; (iii) PaperWeakness, identifying weaknesses in paper submissions; and (iv) REVIEWCRITIQUE, identifying each segment in human reviews is deficient or not. AAAR-1.0 differs from prior benchmarks in two key ways: first, it is explicitly research-oriented, with tasks requiring deep domain expertise; second, it is researcher-oriented, mirroring the primary activities that researchers engage in on a daily basis. An evaluation of both open-source and proprietary LLMs reveals their potential as well as limitations in conducting sophisticated research tasks. We will keep iterating AAAR-1.0 to new versions.

Jian Xie, Kai Zhang, Jiangjie Chen et al. · microsoft-research

Planning has been part of the core pursuit for artificial intelligence since its conception, but earlier AI agents mostly focused on constrained settings because many of the cognitive substrates necessary for human-level planning have been lacking. Recently, language agents powered by large language models (LLMs) have shown interesting capabilities such as tool use and reasoning. Are these language agents capable of planning in more complex settings that are out of the reach of prior AI agents? To advance this investigation, we propose TravelPlanner, a new planning benchmark that focuses on travel planning, a common real-world planning scenario. It provides a rich sandbox environment, various tools for accessing nearly four million data records, and 1,225 meticulously curated planning intents and reference plans. Comprehensive evaluations show that the current language agents are not yet capable of handling such complex planning tasks-even GPT-4 only achieves a success rate of 0.6%. Language agents struggle to stay on task, use the right tools to collect information, or keep track of multiple constraints. However, we note that the mere possibility for language agents to tackle such a complex problem is in itself non-trivial progress. TravelPlanner provides a challenging yet meaningful testbed for future language agents.

Janice Ahn, Rishu Verma, Renze Lou et al.

Mathematical reasoning serves as a cornerstone for assessing the fundamental cognitive capabilities of human intelligence. In recent times, there has been a notable surge in the development of Large Language Models (LLMs) geared towards the automated resolution of mathematical problems. However, the landscape of mathematical problem types is vast and varied, with LLM-oriented techniques undergoing evaluation across diverse datasets and settings. This diversity makes it challenging to discern the true advancements and obstacles within this burgeoning field. This survey endeavors to address four pivotal dimensions: i) a comprehensive exploration of the various mathematical problems and their corresponding datasets that have been investigated; ii) an examination of the spectrum of LLM-oriented techniques that have been proposed for mathematical problem-solving; iii) an overview of factors and concerns affecting LLMs in solving math; and iv) an elucidation of the persisting challenges within this domain. To the best of our knowledge, this survey stands as one of the first extensive examinations of the landscape of LLMs in the realm of mathematics, providing a holistic perspective on the current state, accomplishments, and future challenges in this rapidly evolving field.

Xiaojie Gu, Ziying Huang, Weicong Hong et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) internalize vast world knowledge as parametric memory, yet inevitably inherit the staleness and errors of their source corpora. Consequently, ensuring the reliability and malleability of these internal representations is imperative for trustworthy real-world deployment. Knowledge editing offers a pivotal paradigm for surgically modifying memory without retraining. However, while recent editors demonstrate high success rates on standard benchmarks, it remains questionable whether current evaluation frameworks that rely on assessing output under specific prompting conditions can reliably authenticate genuine memory modification. In this work, we introduce a simple diagnostic framework that subjects models to discriminative self-assessment under in-context learning (ICL) settings that better reflect real-world application environments, specifically designed to scrutinize the subtle behavioral nuances induced by memory modifications. This probing reveals a pervasive phenomenon of Surface Compliance, where editors achieve high benchmark scores by merely mimicking target outputs without structurally overwriting internal beliefs. Moreover, we find that recursive modifications accumulate representational residues, triggering cognitive instability and permanently diminishing the reversibility of the model's memory state. These insights underscore the risks of current editing paradigms and highlight the pivotal role of robust memory modification in building trustworthy, long-term sustainable LLM systems. Code is available at https://github.com/XiaojieGu/SA-MCQ.

Hanzi Xu, Renze Lou, Jiangshu Du et al.

In many classification tasks designed for AI or human to solve, gold labels are typically included within the label space by default, often posed as "which of the following is correct?" This standard setup has traditionally highlighted the strong performance of advanced AI, particularly top-performing Large Language Models (LLMs), in routine classification tasks. However, when the gold label is intentionally excluded from the label space, it becomes evident that LLMs still attempt to select from the available label candidates, even when none are correct. This raises a pivotal question: Do LLMs truly demonstrate their intelligence in understanding the essence of classification tasks? In this study, we evaluate both closed-source and open-source LLMs across representative classification tasks, arguing that the perceived performance of LLMs is overstated due to their inability to exhibit the expected comprehension of the task. This paper makes a threefold contribution: i) To our knowledge, this is the first work to identify the limitations of LLMs in classification tasks when gold labels are absent. We define this task as Classify-w/o-Gold and propose it as a new testbed for LLMs. ii) We introduce a benchmark, Know-No, comprising two existing classification tasks and one new task, to evaluate Classify-w/o-Gold. iii) This work defines and advocates for a new evaluation metric, OmniAccuracy, which assesses LLMs' performance in classification tasks both when gold labels are present and absent.

Jian Xie, Kai Zhang, Jiangjie Chen et al.

By providing external information to large language models (LLMs), tool augmentation (including retrieval augmentation) has emerged as a promising solution for addressing the limitations of LLMs' static parametric memory. However, how receptive are LLMs to such external evidence, especially when the evidence conflicts with their parametric memory? We present the first comprehensive and controlled investigation into the behavior of LLMs when encountering knowledge conflicts. We propose a systematic framework to elicit high-quality parametric memory from LLMs and construct the corresponding counter-memory, which enables us to conduct a series of controlled experiments. Our investigation reveals seemingly contradicting behaviors of LLMs. On the one hand, different from prior wisdom, we find that LLMs can be highly receptive to external evidence even when that conflicts with their parametric memory, given that the external evidence is coherent and convincing. On the other hand, LLMs also demonstrate a strong confirmation bias when the external evidence contains some information that is consistent with their parametric memory, despite being presented with conflicting evidence at the same time. These results pose important implications that are worth careful consideration for the further development and deployment of tool- and retrieval-augmented LLMs. Resources are available at https://github.com/OSU-NLP-Group/LLM-Knowledge-Conflict.

Renze Lou, Baolin Peng, Wenlin Yao et al.

As web agents rapidly evolve, an increasing body of work has moved beyond conventional atomic browser interactions and explored tool use as a higher-level action paradigm. Although prior studies have shown the promise of tools, their conclusions are often drawn from limited experimental scales and sometimes non-comparable settings. As a result, several fundamental questions remain unclear: i) whether tools provide consistent gains for web agents, ii) what practical design principles characterize effective tools, and iii) what side effects tool use may introduce. To establish a stronger empirical foundation for future research, we revisit tool use in web agents through an extensive and carefully controlled study across diverse tool sources, backbone models, tool-use frameworks, and evaluation benchmarks. Our findings both revise some prior conclusions and complement others with broader evidence. We hope this study provides a more reliable empirical basis and inspires future research on tool-use web agents.

Renze Lou, Kai Zhang, Jian Xie et al.

In the realm of large language models (LLMs), enhancing instruction-following capability often involves curating expansive training data. This is achieved through two primary schemes: i) Scaling-Inputs: Amplifying (input, output) pairs per task instruction, aiming for better instruction adherence. ii) Scaling Input-Free Tasks: Enlarging tasks, each composed of an (instruction, output) pair (without requiring a separate input anymore). However, LLMs under Scaling-Inputs tend to be overly sensitive to inputs, leading to misinterpretation or non-compliance with instructions. Conversely, Scaling Input-Free Tasks demands a substantial number of tasks but is less effective in instruction following when dealing with instances in Scaling-Inputs. This work introduces MUFFIN, a new scheme of instruction-following dataset curation. Specifically, we automatically Scale Tasks per Input by diversifying these tasks with various input facets. Experimental results across four zero-shot benchmarks, spanning both Scaling-Inputs and Scaling Input-Free Tasks schemes, reveal that LLMs, at various scales, trained on MUFFIN generally demonstrate superior instruction-following capabilities compared to those trained on the two aforementioned schemes.

Yusen Zhang, Wenliang Zheng, Aashrith Madasu et al.

High-resolution image (HRI) understanding aims to process images with a large number of pixels, such as pathological images and agricultural aerial images, both of which can exceed 1 million pixels. Vision Large Language Models (VLMs) can allegedly handle HRIs, however, there is a lack of a comprehensive benchmark for VLMs to evaluate HRI understanding. To address this gap, we introduce HRScene, a novel unified benchmark for HRI understanding with rich scenes. HRScene incorporates 25 real-world datasets and 2 synthetic diagnostic datasets with resolutions ranging from 1,024 $\times$ 1,024 to 35,503 $\times$ 26,627. HRScene is collected and re-annotated by 10 graduate-level annotators, covering 25 scenarios, ranging from microscopic to radiology images, street views, long-range pictures, and telescope images. It includes HRIs of real-world objects, scanned documents, and composite multi-image. The two diagnostic evaluation datasets are synthesized by combining the target image with the gold answer and distracting images in different orders, assessing how well models utilize regions in HRI. We conduct extensive experiments involving 28 VLMs, including Gemini 2.0 Flash and GPT-4o. Experiments on HRScene show that current VLMs achieve an average accuracy of around 50% on real-world tasks, revealing significant gaps in HRI understanding. Results on synthetic datasets reveal that VLMs struggle to effectively utilize HRI regions, showing significant Regional Divergence and lost-in-middle, shedding light on future research.

Jiangshu Du, Yibo Wang, Wenting Zhao et al.

This work is motivated by two key trends. On one hand, large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable versatility in various generative tasks such as writing, drawing, and question answering, significantly reducing the time required for many routine tasks. On the other hand, researchers, whose work is not only time-consuming but also highly expertise-demanding, face increasing challenges as they have to spend more time reading, writing, and reviewing papers. This raises the question: how can LLMs potentially assist researchers in alleviating their heavy workload? This study focuses on the topic of LLMs assist NLP Researchers, particularly examining the effectiveness of LLM in assisting paper (meta-)reviewing and its recognizability. To address this, we constructed the ReviewCritique dataset, which includes two types of information: (i) NLP papers (initial submissions rather than camera-ready) with both human-written and LLM-generated reviews, and (ii) each review comes with "deficiency" labels and corresponding explanations for individual segments, annotated by experts. Using ReviewCritique, this study explores two threads of research questions: (i) "LLMs as Reviewers", how do reviews generated by LLMs compare with those written by humans in terms of quality and distinguishability? (ii) "LLMs as Metareviewers", how effectively can LLMs identify potential issues, such as Deficient or unprofessional review segments, within individual paper reviews? To our knowledge, this is the first work to provide such a comprehensive analysis.

Xi Li, Ruofan Mao, Yusen Zhang et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs), especially those accessed via APIs, have demonstrated impressive capabilities across various domains. However, users without technical expertise often turn to (untrustworthy) third-party services, such as prompt engineering, to enhance their LLM experience, creating vulnerabilities to adversarial threats like backdoor attacks. Backdoor-compromised LLMs generate malicious outputs to users when inputs contain specific "triggers" set by attackers. Traditional defense strategies, originally designed for small-scale models, are impractical for API-accessible LLMs due to limited model access, high computational costs, and data requirements. To address these limitations, we propose Chain-of-Scrutiny (CoS) which leverages LLMs' unique reasoning abilities to mitigate backdoor attacks. It guides the LLM to generate reasoning steps for a given input and scrutinizes for consistency with the final output -- any inconsistencies indicating a potential attack. It is well-suited for the popular API-only LLM deployments, enabling detection at minimal cost and with little data. User-friendly and driven by natural language, it allows non-experts to perform the defense independently while maintaining transparency. We validate the effectiveness of CoS through extensive experiments on various tasks and LLMs, with results showing greater benefits for more powerful LLMs.

Weicheng Ma, Renze Lou, Kai Zhang et al.

A key problem in multi-task learning (MTL) research is how to select high-quality auxiliary tasks automatically. This paper presents GradTS, an automatic auxiliary task selection method based on gradient calculation in Transformer-based models. Compared to AUTOSEM, a strong baseline method, GradTS improves the performance of MT-DNN with a bert-base-cased backend model, from 0.33% to 17.93% on 8 natural language understanding (NLU) tasks in the GLUE benchmarks. GradTS is also time-saving since (1) its gradient calculations are based on single-task experiments and (2) the gradients are re-used without additional experiments when the candidate task set changes. On the 8 GLUE classification tasks, for example, GradTS costs on average 21.32% less time than AUTOSEM with comparable GPU consumption. Further, we show the robustness of GradTS across various task settings and model selections, e.g. mixed objectives among candidate tasks. The efficiency and efficacy of GradTS in these case studies illustrate its general applicability in MTL research without requiring manual task filtering or costly parameter tuning.

Weicheng Ma, Kai Zhang, Renze Lou et al.

This paper studies the relative importance of attention heads in Transformer-based models to aid their interpretability in cross-lingual and multi-lingual tasks. Prior research has found that only a few attention heads are important in each mono-lingual Natural Language Processing (NLP) task and pruning the remaining heads leads to comparable or improved performance of the model. However, the impact of pruning attention heads is not yet clear in cross-lingual and multi-lingual tasks. Through extensive experiments, we show that (1) pruning a number of attention heads in a multi-lingual Transformer-based model has, in general, positive effects on its performance in cross-lingual and multi-lingual tasks and (2) the attention heads to be pruned can be ranked using gradients and identified with a few trial experiments. Our experiments focus on sequence labeling tasks, with potential applicability on other cross-lingual and multi-lingual tasks. For comprehensiveness, we examine two pre-trained multi-lingual models, namely multi-lingual BERT (mBERT) and XLM-R, on three tasks across 9 languages each. We also discuss the validity of our findings and their extensibility to truly resource-scarce languages and other task settings.