Tanya Gupta

Adrian Mirza, Nawaf Alampara, Sreekanth Kunchapu et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have gained widespread interest due to their ability to process human language and perform tasks on which they have not been explicitly trained. However, we possess only a limited systematic understanding of the chemical capabilities of LLMs, which would be required to improve models and mitigate potential harm. Here, we introduce "ChemBench," an automated framework for evaluating the chemical knowledge and reasoning abilities of state-of-the-art LLMs against the expertise of chemists. We curated more than 2,700 question-answer pairs, evaluated leading open- and closed-source LLMs, and found that the best models outperformed the best human chemists in our study on average. However, the models struggle with some basic tasks and provide overconfident predictions. These findings reveal LLMs' impressive chemical capabilities while emphasizing the need for further research to improve their safety and usefulness. They also suggest adapting chemistry education and show the value of benchmarking frameworks for evaluating LLMs in specific domains.

Aseem Srivastava, Tanya Gupta, Alison Cerezo et al.

Online Mental Health Communities (OMHCs), such as Reddit, have witnessed a surge in popularity as go-to platforms for seeking information and support in managing mental health needs. Platforms like Reddit offer immediate interactions with peers, granting users a vital space for seeking mental health assistance. However, the largely unregulated nature of these platforms introduces intricate challenges for both users and society at large. This study explores the factors that drive peer engagement within counseling threads, aiming to enhance our understanding of this critical phenomenon. We introduce BeCOPE, a novel behavior encoded Peer counseling dataset comprising over 10,118 posts and 58,279 comments sourced from 21 mental health-specific subreddits. The dataset is annotated using three major fine-grained behavior labels: (a) intent, (b) criticism, and (c) readability, along with the emotion labels. Our analysis indicates the prominence of ``self-criticism'' as the most prevalent form of criticism expressed by help-seekers, accounting for a significant 43% of interactions. Intriguingly, we observe that individuals who explicitly express their need for help are 18.01% more likely to receive assistance compared to those who present ``surveys'' or engage in ``rants.'' Furthermore, we highlight the pivotal role of well-articulated problem descriptions, showing that superior readability effectively doubles the likelihood of receiving the sought-after support. Our study emphasizes the essential role of OMHCs in offering personalized guidance and unveils behavior-driven engagement patterns.