Hyeonseok Moon

Sugyeong Eo, Hyeonseok Moon, Evelyn Hayoon Zi et al.

Multiagent collaboration has emerged as a promising framework for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). Despite improvements in reasoning, the approach introduces substantial computational overhead resulting from iterative agent interactions. Furthermore, engaging in unnecessary debates increases the risk of generating erroneous responses. To address these challenges, we propose Debate Only When Necessary (DOWN), an adaptive multiagent debate framework that selectively activates debate based on the confidence score of the agent's initial response. Debate is activated only for queries requiring further deliberation, during which agents refine their outputs by referencing peer responses and associated confidence scores. Evaluations on benchmarks show that DOWN improves efficiency by up to six times while preserving or even outperforming the performance of existing methods. Further analysis indicates that DOWN effectively mitigates the risk of error propagation stemming from the unnecessary debate process. These findings demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in delivering high-performance LLM solutions at a lower computational cost.

Hyeonseok Moon, Jaehyung Seo, Seungyoon Lee et al.

One of the key strengths of Large Language Models (LLMs) is their ability to interact with humans by generating appropriate responses to given instructions. This ability, known as instruction-following capability, has established a foundation for the use of LLMs across various fields and serves as a crucial metric for evaluating their performance. While numerous evaluation benchmarks have been developed, most focus solely on clear and coherent instructions. However, we have noted that LLMs can become easily distracted by instruction-formatted statements, which may lead to an oversight of their instruction comprehension skills. To address this issue, we introduce the Intention of Instruction (IoInst) benchmark. This benchmark evaluates LLMs' capacity to remain focused and understand instructions without being misled by extraneous instructions. The primary objective of this benchmark is to identify the appropriate instruction that accurately guides the generation of a given context. Our findings suggest that even recently introduced state-of-the-art models still lack instruction understanding capability. Along with the proposition of IoInst in this study, we also present broad analyses of the several strategies potentially applicable to IoInst.

Jungseob Lee, Seongtae Hong, Hyeonseok Moon et al.

Adapting large language models to other languages typically employs supervised fine-tuning (SFT) as a standard approach. However, it often suffers from an overemphasis on English performance, a phenomenon that is especially pronounced in data-constrained environments. To overcome these challenges, we propose \textbf{Cross-Lingual Optimization (CLO)} that efficiently transfers an English-centric LLM to a target language while preserving its English capabilities. CLO utilizes publicly available English SFT data and a translation model to enable cross-lingual transfer. We conduct experiments using five models on six languages, each possessing varying levels of resource. Our results show that CLO consistently outperforms SFT in both acquiring target language proficiency and maintaining English performance. Remarkably, in low-resource languages, CLO with only 3,200 samples surpasses SFT with 6,400 samples, demonstrating that CLO can achieve better performance with less data. Furthermore, we find that SFT is particularly sensitive to data quantity in medium and low-resource languages, whereas CLO remains robust. Our comprehensive analysis emphasizes the limitations of SFT and incorporates additional training strategies in CLO to enhance efficiency.

Jaehyung Seo, Hyeonseok Moon, Heuiseok Lim

Recent studies on hallucination in large language models (LLMs) have been actively progressing in natural language processing. However, the impact of negated text on hallucination with LLMs remains largely unexplored. In this paper, we set three important yet unanswered research questions and aim to address them. To derive the answers, we investigate whether LLMs can recognize contextual shifts caused by negation and still reliably distinguish hallucinations comparable to affirmative cases. We also design the NegHalu dataset by reconstructing existing hallucination detection datasets with negated expressions. Our experiments demonstrate that LLMs struggle to detect hallucinations in negated text effectively, often producing logically inconsistent or unfaithful judgments. Moreover, we trace the internal state of LLMs as they process negated inputs at the token level and reveal the challenges of mitigating their unintended effects.