Chi Han

CL
h-index2
3papers
87citations
Novelty50%
AI Score50

3 Papers

16.3CLMar 17, 2025Code
Can Language Models Follow Multiple Turns of Entangled Instructions?

Chi Han, Xin Liu, Haodong Wang et al.

Despite significant achievements in improving the instruction-following capabilities of large language models (LLMs), the ability to process multiple potentially entangled or conflicting instructions remains a considerable challenge. Real-world scenarios often require consistency across multiple instructions over time, such as secret privacy, personal preferences, and prioritization, which demand sophisticated abilities to integrate multiple turns and carefully balance competing objectives when instructions intersect or conflict. This work presents a systematic investigation of LLMs' capabilities in handling multiple turns of instructions, covering three levels of difficulty: (1) retrieving information from instructions, (2) tracking and reasoning across turns, and (3) resolving conflicts among instructions. We construct MultiTurnInstruct~with $\sim$1.1K high-quality multi-turn conversations through the human-in-the-loop approach and result in nine capability categories, including statics and dynamics, reasoning, and multitasking. Our finding reveals an intriguing trade-off between different capabilities. While GPT models demonstrate superior memorization, they show reduced effectiveness in privacy-protection tasks requiring selective information withholding. Larger models exhibit stronger reasoning capabilities but still struggle with resolving conflicting instructions. Importantly, these performance gaps cannot be attributed solely to information loss, as models demonstrate strong BLEU scores on memorization tasks. Still, their attention mechanisms fail to integrate multiple related instructions effectively. These findings highlight critical areas for improvement in complex real-world tasks involving multi-turn instructions. Data and codes are released at https://github.com/Glaciohound/Multi-Turn-Instruct.

1.4LGFeb 24
Protein Language Models Diverge from Natural Language: Comparative Analysis and Improved Inference

Anna Hart, Chi Han, Jeonghwan Kim et al.

Modern Protein Language Models (PLMs) apply transformer-based model architectures from natural language processing to biological sequences, predicting a variety of protein functions and properties. However, protein language has key differences from natural language, such as a rich functional space despite a vocabulary of only 20 amino acids. These differences motivate research into how transformer-based architectures operate differently in the protein domain and how we can better leverage PLMs to solve protein-related tasks. In this work, we begin by directly comparing how the distribution of information stored across layers of attention heads differs between the protein and natural language domain. Furthermore, we adapt a simple early-exit technique-originally used in the natural language domain to improve efficiency at the cost of performance-to achieve both increased accuracy and substantial efficiency gains in protein non-structural property prediction by allowing the model to automatically select protein representations from the intermediate layers of the PLMs for the specific task and protein at hand. We achieve performance gains ranging from 0.4 to 7.01 percentage points while simultaneously improving efficiency by over 10 percent across models and non-structural prediction tasks. Our work opens up an area of research directly comparing how language models change behavior when moved into the protein domain and advances language modeling in biological domains.

20.0CVFeb 4, 2020Code
Visual Concept-Metaconcept Learning

Chi Han, Jiayuan Mao, Chuang Gan et al.

Humans reason with concepts and metaconcepts: we recognize red and green from visual input; we also understand that they describe the same property of objects (i.e., the color). In this paper, we propose the visual concept-metaconcept learner (VCML) for joint learning of concepts and metaconcepts from images and associated question-answer pairs. The key is to exploit the bidirectional connection between visual concepts and metaconcepts. Visual representations provide grounding cues for predicting relations between unseen pairs of concepts. Knowing that red and green describe the same property of objects, we generalize to the fact that cube and sphere also describe the same property of objects, since they both categorize the shape of objects. Meanwhile, knowledge about metaconcepts empowers visual concept learning from limited, noisy, and even biased data. From just a few examples of purple cubes we can understand a new color purple, which resembles the hue of the cubes instead of the shape of them. Evaluation on both synthetic and real-world datasets validates our claims.