Weihe Zhai

Weihe Zhai, Arkaitz Zubiaga

The fusion of language models (LMs) and knowledge graphs (KGs) is widely used in commonsense question answering, but generating faithful explanations remains challenging. Current methods often overlook path decoding faithfulness, leading to divergence between graph encoder outputs and model predictions. We identify confounding effects and LM-KG misalignment as key factors causing spurious explanations. To address this, we introduce the LM-KG Fidelity metric to assess KG representation reliability and propose the LM-KG Distribution-aware Alignment (\textit{LKDA}) algorithm to improve explanation faithfulness. Without ground truth, we evaluate KG explanations using the proposed Fidelity-Sparsity Trade-off Curve. Experiments on CommonsenseQA and OpenBookQA show that LKDA significantly enhances explanation fidelity and model performance, highlighting the need to address distributional misalignment for reliable commonsense reasoning.

Leixin Zhang, Steffen Eger, Yinjie Cheng et al.

Multimodal large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in generating high-quality images from textual instructions. However, their performance in generating scientific images--a critical application for accelerating scientific progress--remains underexplored. In this work, we address this gap by introducing ScImage, a benchmark designed to evaluate the multimodal capabilities of LLMs in generating scientific images from textual descriptions. ScImage assesses three key dimensions of understanding: spatial, numeric, and attribute comprehension, as well as their combinations, focusing on the relationships between scientific objects (e.g., squares, circles). We evaluate five models, GPT-4o, Llama, AutomaTikZ, Dall-E, and StableDiffusion, using two modes of output generation: code-based outputs (Python, TikZ) and direct raster image generation. Additionally, we examine four different input languages: English, German, Farsi, and Chinese. Our evaluation, conducted with 11 scientists across three criteria (correctness, relevance, and scientific accuracy), reveals that while GPT-4o produces outputs of decent quality for simpler prompts involving individual dimensions such as spatial, numeric, or attribute understanding in isolation, all models face challenges in this task, especially for more complex prompts.