Zhiying Deng

Wei Liu, Jun Wang, Haozhao Wang et al.

Rationalization is a self-explaining framework for NLP models. Conventional work typically uses the maximum mutual information (MMI) criterion to find the rationale that is most indicative of the target label. However, this criterion can be influenced by spurious features that correlate with the causal rationale or the target label. Instead of attempting to rectify the issues of the MMI criterion, we propose a novel criterion to uncover the causal rationale, termed the Minimum Conditional Dependence (MCD) criterion, which is grounded on our finding that the non-causal features and the target label are \emph{d-separated} by the causal rationale. By minimizing the dependence between the unselected parts of the input and the target label conditioned on the selected rationale candidate, all the causes of the label are compelled to be selected. In this study, we employ a simple and practical measure of dependence, specifically the KL-divergence, to validate our proposed MCD criterion. Empirically, we demonstrate that MCD improves the F1 score by up to $13.7\%$ compared to previous state-of-the-art MMI-based methods. Our code is available at: \url{https://github.com/jugechengzi/Rationalization-MCD}.

Xinchi Zou, Tongzhenzhi Su, Jianjun Li et al.

Knowledge Graphs (KGs) have proven highly effective for recommendation systems by capturing latent item relationships, while recent integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) has further enhanced semantic understanding and addressed knowledge sparsity issues. Nevertheless, current KG-and-LLM-based methods still face three main limitations: 1) inadequate modeling of implicit semantic relationships beyond explicit KG links; 2) suboptimal single-channel fusion of ID and LLM embeddings, which often leads to signal interference and blurred representations; and 3) insufficient consideration of user-item interaction frequency variations in recommendation strategies. To address these challenges, we propose the Dual-Channel Graph Learning (DCGL) framework, featuring three key innovations: 1) a dual-channel architecture that structurally decouples rich semantic information from user behavioral patterns, preventing early interference; 2) a multi-level contrastive learning mechanism that enhances robustness against KG noise through intra-view contrasts and bridges semantic gaps between channels via inter-view alignment; and 3) a dynamic fusion mechanism that adaptively balances semantic generalization and behavioral specificity based on interaction frequency, resolving the cascading limitation. Extensive experiments on four real-world datasets show that DCGL consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods, yielding substantial improvements in sparse scenarios while maintaining precision for active users. Our code is available at https://github.com/XinchiZou/DCGL.

Wei Liu, Hongkai Liu, Zhiying Deng et al.

LLM parameter editing methods commonly rely on computing an ideal target hidden-state at a target layer (referred as anchor point) and distributing the target vector to multiple preceding layers (commonly known as backward spreading) for cooperative editing. Although widely used for a long time, its underlying basis have not been systematically investigated. In this paper, we first conduct a systematic study of its foundations, which helps clarify its capability boundaries, practical considerations, and potential failure modes. Then, we propose a simple and elegant alternative that replaces backward spreading with forward-propagation. Instead of optimizing the target at the last editing layer, we optimize the anchor point at the first editing layer, and then propagate it forward to obtain accurate and mutually compatible target hidden-states for all subsequent editing layers. This approach achieves the same computational complexity as existing methods while producing more accurate layer-wise targets. Our method is simple, without interfering with either the computation of the initial target hidden state or any other components of the subsequent editing pipeline, and thus constituting a benefit for a wide range of LLM parameter editing methods.

Zhiying Deng, Yuan Fu, Usman Farooq et al.

Next-basket recommendation (NBR) is a type of recommendation that aims to predict a set of items a user will purchase based on their historical transaction basket sequences. It is governed by a dynamic interplay between two distinct user intents: habitual repurchase, which involves repeating past behaviors, and exploratory interest, which involves discovering new items. However, existing NBR methods generally suffer from two limitations: (1) they often entangle these conflicting motives within a single representation, causing habits to overshadow discovery, and (2) they rely on discrete sequential modeling that ignores continuous-time intervals and item-specific periodicities. In this paper, we propose a novel solution named Time-Interval Disentangled Experts (TIDE) to address these challenges. TIDE incorporates a Hawkes-enhanced Fourier Time Encoding to capture item-specific temporal periodicities and dynamic decay. To decouple user intentions, TIDE utilizes a dual-expert architecture that integrates a Habit Expert for recurring needs and a Pattern-Guided Exploration Expert for discovery. Combined with an item-aware gating mechanism, TIDE adaptively balances repurchase and exploration. Extensive experiments on four diverse real-world datasets demonstrate that TIDE consistently outperforms representative state-of-the-art NBR methods.

Wei Liu, Haozhao Wang, Jun Wang et al.

Rationalization empowers deep learning models with self-explaining capabilities through a cooperative game, where a generator selects a semantically consistent subset of the input as a rationale, and a subsequent predictor makes predictions based on the selected rationale. In this paper, we discover that rationalization is prone to a problem named \emph{rationale shift}, which arises from the algorithmic bias of the cooperative game. Rationale shift refers to a situation where the semantics of the selected rationale may deviate from the original input, but the predictor still produces accurate predictions based on the deviation, resulting in a compromised generator with misleading feedback. To address this issue, we first demonstrate the importance of the alignment between the rationale and the full input through both empirical observations and theoretical analysis. Subsequently, we introduce a novel approach called DAR (\textbf{D}iscriminatively \textbf{A}ligned \textbf{R}ationalization), which utilizes an auxiliary module pretrained on the full input to discriminatively align the selected rationale and the original input. We theoretically illustrate how DAR accomplishes the desired alignment, thereby overcoming the rationale shift problem. The experiments on two widely used real-world benchmarks show that the proposed method significantly improves the explanation quality (measured by the overlap between the model-selected explanation and the human-annotated rationale) as compared to state-of-the-art techniques. Additionally, results on two synthetic settings further validate the effectiveness of DAR in addressing the rationale shift problem.

Wei Liu, Zhiying Deng, Zhongyu Niu et al.

Extracting a small subset of crucial rationales from the full input is a key problem in explainability research. The most widely used fundamental criterion for rationale extraction is the maximum mutual information (MMI) criterion. In this paper, we first demonstrate that MMI suffers from diminishing marginal returns. Once part of the rationale has been identified, finding the remaining portions contributes only marginally to increasing the mutual information, making it difficult to use MMI to locate the rest. In contrast to MMI that aims to reproduce the prediction, we seek to identify the parts of the input that the network can actually utilize. This is achieved by comparing how different rationale candidates match the capability space of the weight matrix. The weight matrix of a neural network is typically low-rank, meaning that the linear combinations of its column vectors can only cover part of the directions in a high-dimensional space (high-dimension: the dimensions of an input vector). If an input is fully utilized by the network, {it generally matches these directions (e.g., a portion of a hypersphere), resulting in a representation with a high norm. Conversely, if an input primarily falls outside (orthogonal to) these directions}, its representation norm will approach zero, behaving like noise that the network cannot effectively utilize. Building on this, we propose using the norms of rationale candidates as an alternative objective to MMI. Through experiments on four text classification datasets and one graph classification dataset using three network architectures (GRUs, BERT, and GCN), we show that our method outperforms MMI and its improved variants in identifying better rationales. We also compare our method with a representative LLM (llama-3.1-8b-instruct) and find that our simple method gets comparable results to it and can sometimes even outperform it.

Wei Liu, Zhongyu Niu, Lang Gao et al.

This study investigates the self-rationalization framework constructed with a cooperative game, where a generator initially extracts the most informative segment from raw input, and a subsequent predictor utilizes the selected subset for its input. The generator and predictor are trained collaboratively to maximize prediction accuracy. In this paper, we first uncover a potential caveat: such a cooperative game could unintentionally introduce a sampling bias during rationale extraction. Specifically, the generator might inadvertently create an incorrect correlation between the selected rationale candidate and the label, even when they are semantically unrelated in the original dataset. Subsequently, we elucidate the origins of this bias using both detailed theoretical analysis and empirical evidence. Our findings suggest a direction for inspecting these correlations through attacks, based on which we further introduce an instruction to prevent the predictor from learning the correlations. Through experiments on six text classification datasets and two graph classification datasets using three network architectures (GRUs, BERT, and GCN), we show that our method not only significantly outperforms recent rationalization methods, but also achieves comparable or even better results than a representative LLM (llama3.1-8b-instruct).

Wei Liu, Haomei Xu, Bingqing Liu et al.

Large language models (LLMs) inevitably encode outdated or incorrect knowledge. Updating, deleting, and forgetting such knowledge is important for alignment, safety, and other issues. To address this issue, model editing has emerged as a promising paradigm: by precisely editing a small subset of parameters such that a specific fact is updated while preserving other knowledge. Despite its great success reported in previous papers, we find the apparent reliability of editing rests on a fragile foundation and the current literature is largely driven by illusory success. The fundamental goal of steering the model's output toward a target with minimal modification would encourage exploiting hidden shortcuts, rather than utilizing real semantics. This problem directly challenges the feasibility of the current model editing literature at its very foundation, as shortcuts are inherently at odds with robust knowledge integration. Coincidentally, this issue has long been obscured by evaluation frameworks that lack the design of negative examples. To uncover it, we systematically develop a suite of new evaluation methods. Strikingly, we find that state-of-the-art approaches collapse even under the simplest negation queries. Our empirical evidence shows that editing is likely to be based on shortcuts rather than full semantics, calling for an urgent reconsideration of the very basis of model editing before further advancements can be meaningfully pursued.