Jingwei Ni

Jingwei Ni, Zhijing Jin, Markus Freitag et al. · deepmind, eth-zurich

Human-translated text displays distinct features from naturally written text in the same language. This phenomena, known as translationese, has been argued to confound the machine translation (MT) evaluation. Yet, we find that existing work on translationese neglects some important factors and the conclusions are mostly correlational but not causal. In this work, we collect CausalMT, a dataset where the MT training data are also labeled with the human translation directions. We inspect two critical factors, the train-test direction match (whether the human translation directions in the training and test sets are aligned), and data-model direction match (whether the model learns in the same direction as the human translation direction in the dataset). We show that these two factors have a large causal effect on the MT performance, in addition to the test-model direction mismatch highlighted by existing work on the impact of translationese. In light of our findings, we provide a set of suggestions for MT training and evaluation. Our code and data are at https://github.com/EdisonNi-hku/CausalMT

Saeid Ashraf Vaghefi, Qian Wang, Veruska Muccione et al. · eth-zurich

Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant progress in recent years, achieving remarkable results in question-answering tasks (QA). However, they still face two major challenges: hallucination and outdated information after the training phase. These challenges take center stage in critical domains like climate change, where obtaining accurate and up-to-date information from reliable sources in a limited time is essential and difficult. To overcome these barriers, one potential solution is to provide LLMs with access to external, scientifically accurate, and robust sources (long-term memory) to continuously update their knowledge and prevent the propagation of inaccurate, incorrect, or outdated information. In this study, we enhanced GPT-4 by integrating the information from the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental (IPCC AR6), the most comprehensive, up-to-date, and reliable source in this domain. We present our conversational AI prototype, available at www.chatclimate.ai and demonstrate its ability to answer challenging questions accurately in three different QA scenarios: asking from 1) GPT-4, 2) chatClimate, and 3) hybrid chatClimate. The answers and their sources were evaluated by our team of IPCC authors, who used their expert knowledge to score the accuracy of the answers from 1 (very-low) to 5 (very-high). The evaluation showed that the hybrid chatClimate provided more accurate answers, highlighting the effectiveness of our solution. This approach can be easily scaled for chatbots in specific domains, enabling the delivery of reliable and accurate information.

Jingwei Ni, Julia Bingler, Chiara Colesanti-Senni et al. · eth-zurich

In the face of climate change, are companies really taking substantial steps toward more sustainable operations? A comprehensive answer lies in the dense, information-rich landscape of corporate sustainability reports. However, the sheer volume and complexity of these reports make human analysis very costly. Therefore, only a few entities worldwide have the resources to analyze these reports at scale, which leads to a lack of transparency in sustainability reporting. Empowering stakeholders with LLM-based automatic analysis tools can be a promising way to democratize sustainability report analysis. However, developing such tools is challenging due to (1) the hallucination of LLMs and (2) the inefficiency of bringing domain experts into the AI development loop. In this paper, we ChatReport, a novel LLM-based system to automate the analysis of corporate sustainability reports, addressing existing challenges by (1) making the answers traceable to reduce the harm of hallucination and (2) actively involving domain experts in the development loop. We make our methodology, annotated datasets, and generated analyses of 1015 reports publicly available.

Mubashara Akhtar, Anka Reuel, Prajna Soni et al. · meta-ai

Artificial Intelligence (AI) benchmarks play a central role in measuring progress in model development and guiding deployment decisions. However, many benchmarks quickly become saturated, meaning that they can no longer differentiate between the best-performing models, diminishing their long-term value. In this study, we analyze benchmark saturation across 60 Large Language Model (LLM) benchmarks selected from technical reports by major model developers. To identify factors driving saturation, we characterize benchmarks along 14 properties spanning task design, data construction, and evaluation format. We test five hypotheses examining how each property contributes to saturation rates. Our analysis reveals that nearly half of the benchmarks exhibit saturation, with rates increasing as benchmarks age. Notably, hiding test data (i.e., public vs. private) shows no protective effect, while expert-curated benchmarks resist saturation better than crowdsourced ones. Our findings highlight which design choices extend benchmark longevity and inform strategies for more durable evaluation.

Jingwei Ni, Julia Bingler, Chiara Colesanti-Senni et al. · eth-zurich

This paper introduces a novel approach to enhance Large Language Models (LLMs) with expert knowledge to automate the analysis of corporate sustainability reports by benchmarking them against the Task Force for Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations. Corporate sustainability reports are crucial in assessing organizations' environmental and social risks and impacts. However, analyzing these reports' vast amounts of information makes human analysis often too costly. As a result, only a few entities worldwide have the resources to analyze these reports, which could lead to a lack of transparency. While AI-powered tools can automatically analyze the data, they are prone to inaccuracies as they lack domain-specific expertise. This paper introduces a novel approach to enhance LLMs with expert knowledge to automate the analysis of corporate sustainability reports. We christen our tool CHATREPORT, and apply it in a first use case to assess corporate climate risk disclosures following the TCFD recommendations. CHATREPORT results from collaborating with experts in climate science, finance, economic policy, and computer science, demonstrating how domain experts can be involved in developing AI tools. We make our prompt templates, generated data, and scores available to the public to encourage transparency.

Tobias Schimanski, Jingwei Ni, Mathias Kraus et al. · eth-zurich

Advances towards more faithful and traceable answers of Large Language Models (LLMs) are crucial for various research and practical endeavors. One avenue in reaching this goal is basing the answers on reliable sources. However, this Evidence-Based QA has proven to work insufficiently with LLMs in terms of citing the correct sources (source quality) and truthfully representing the information within sources (answer attributability). In this work, we systematically investigate how to robustly fine-tune LLMs for better source quality and answer attributability. Specifically, we introduce a data generation pipeline with automated data quality filters, which can synthesize diversified high-quality training and testing data at scale. We further introduce four test sets to benchmark the robustness of fine-tuned specialist models. Extensive evaluation shows that fine-tuning on synthetic data improves performance on both in- and out-of-distribution. Furthermore, we show that data quality, which can be drastically improved by proposed quality filters, matters more than quantity in improving Evidence-Based QA.

Markus Leippold, Saeid Ashraf Vaghefi, Dominik Stammbach et al. · eth-zurich

This paper presents Climinator, a novel AI-based tool designed to automate the fact-checking of climate change claims. Utilizing an array of Large Language Models (LLMs) informed by authoritative sources like the IPCC reports and peer-reviewed scientific literature, Climinator employs an innovative Mediator-Advocate framework. This design allows Climinator to effectively synthesize varying scientific perspectives, leading to robust, evidence-based evaluations. Our model demonstrates remarkable accuracy when testing claims collected from Climate Feedback and Skeptical Science. Notably, when integrating an advocate with a climate science denial perspective in our framework, Climinator's iterative debate process reliably converges towards scientific consensus, underscoring its adeptness at reconciling diverse viewpoints into science-based, factual conclusions. While our research is subject to certain limitations and necessitates careful interpretation, our approach holds significant potential. We hope to stimulate further research and encourage exploring its applicability in other contexts, including political fact-checking and legal domains.

Jingwei Ni, Yu Fan, Vilém Zouhar et al. · eth-zurich

Variation in human annotation (i.e., disagreements) is common in NLP, often reflecting important information like task subjectivity and sample ambiguity. Modeling this variation is important for applications that are sensitive to such information. Although RLVR-style reasoning (Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards) has improved Large Language Model (LLM) performance on many tasks, it remains unclear whether such reasoning enables LLMs to capture informative variation in human annotation. In this work, we evaluate the influence of different reasoning settings on LLM disagreement modeling. We systematically evaluate each reasoning setting across model sizes, distribution expression methods, and steering methods, resulting in 60 experimental setups across 3 tasks. Surprisingly, our results show that RLVR-style reasoning degrades performance in disagreement modeling, while naive Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning improves the performance of RLHF LLMs (RL from human feedback). These findings underscore the potential risk of replacing human annotators with reasoning LLMs, especially when disagreements are important.

Tobias Schimanski, Chiara Colesanti Senni, Glen Gostlow et al. · eth-zurich

Nature is an amorphous concept. Yet, it is essential for the planet's well-being to understand how the economy interacts with it. To address the growing demand for information on corporate nature disclosure, we provide datasets and classifiers to detect nature communication by companies. We ground our approach in the guidelines of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD). Particularly, we focus on the specific dimensions of water, forest, and biodiversity. For each dimension, we create an expert-annotated dataset with 2,200 text samples and train classifier models. Furthermore, we show that nature communication is more prevalent in hotspot areas and directly effected industries like agriculture and utilities. Our approach is the first to respond to calls to assess corporate nature communication on a large scale.

Yongan Yu, Xianda Du, Qingchen Hu et al.

Historical archives on weather events are collections of enduring primary source records that offer rich, untapped narratives of how societies have experienced and responded to extreme weather events. These qualitative accounts provide insights into societal vulnerability and resilience that are largely absent from meteorological records, making them valuable for climate scientists to understand societal responses. However, their vast scale, noisy digitized quality, and archaic language make it difficult to transform them into structured knowledge for climate research. To address this challenge, we introduce WeatherArchive-Bench, the first benchmark for evaluating retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems on historical weather archives. WeatherArchive-Bench comprises two tasks: WeatherArchive-Retrieval, which measures a system's ability to locate historically relevant passages from over one million archival news segments, and WeatherArchive-Assessment, which evaluates whether Large Language Models (LLMs) can classify societal vulnerability and resilience indicators from extreme weather narratives. Extensive experiments across sparse, dense, and re-ranking retrievers, as well as a diverse set of LLMs, reveal that dense retrievers often fail on historical terminology, while LLMs frequently misinterpret vulnerability and resilience concepts. These findings highlight key limitations in reasoning about complex societal indicators and provide insights for designing more robust climate-focused RAG systems from archival contexts. The constructed dataset and evaluation framework are publicly available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/WeatherArchive-Bench/.

Jingwei Ni, Zhijing Jin, Qian Wang et al.

Multi-task learning (MTL) aims at achieving a better model by leveraging data and knowledge from multiple tasks. However, MTL does not always work -- sometimes negative transfer occurs between tasks, especially when aggregating loosely related skills, leaving it an open question when MTL works. Previous studies show that MTL performance can be improved by algorithmic tricks. However, what tasks and skills should be included is less well explored. In this work, we conduct a case study in Financial NLP where multiple datasets exist for skills relevant to the domain, such as numeric reasoning and sentiment analysis. Due to the task difficulty and data scarcity in the Financial NLP domain, we explore when aggregating such diverse skills from multiple datasets with MTL can work. Our findings suggest that the key to MTL success lies in skill diversity, relatedness between tasks, and choice of aggregation size and shared capacity. Specifically, MTL works well when tasks are diverse but related, and when the size of the task aggregation and the shared capacity of the model are balanced to avoid overwhelming certain tasks.