United States

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in comprehensively handling various types of natural language processing (NLP) tasks. However, there are significant differences in the knowledge and abilities required for different tasks. Therefore, it is important to understand whether the same LLM processes different tasks in the same way. Are there specific neurons in a LLM for different tasks? Inspired by neuroscience, this paper pioneers the exploration of whether distinct neurons are activated when a LLM handles different tasks. Compared with current research exploring the neurons of language and knowledge, task-specific neurons present a greater challenge due to their abstractness, diversity, and complexity. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a method for task-specific neuron localization based on Causal Gradient Variation with Special Tokens (CGVST). CGVST identifies task-specific neurons by concentrating on the most significant tokens during task processing, thereby eliminating redundant tokens and minimizing interference from non-essential neurons. Compared to traditional neuron localization methods, our approach can more effectively identify task-specific neurons. We conduct experiments across eight different public tasks. Experiments involving the inhibition and amplification of identified neurons demonstrate that our method can accurately locate task-specific neurons.

EMNLP 2024

Does Large Language Model Contain Task-Specific Neurons?

knights and knaves puzzles

logical reasoning

evaluation

We are pleased to announce the Fortieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-26), which will be held in Singapore EXPO from January 20 to January 27, 2026.

The purpose of the AAAI conference series is to promote research in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and foster scientific exchange between researchers, practitioners, scientists, students, and engineers across the entirety of AI and its affiliated disciplines. AAAI-26 will feature technical paper presentations, special tracks, invited speakers, workshops, tutorials, poster sessions, senior member presentations, competitions, and exhibit programs, and a range of other activities to be announced.

To access this event page, you need to log in with the **email address you registered with**. Access credentials will be sent to your email from Underline - subject line "Welcome to AAAI 2026". Please be sure to check your spam email folder if you do not see an email confirmation right away.

Please log in

To access this event page, you are required to register.
Please complete your registration to continue.

We recommend reading [**the registration information**](https://aaai.org/conference/aaai/aaai-26/registration/) first.

**Online Registration Form**: https://aaai.getregistered.net/conference-2026 

Registration Required

AAAI 2026

We are pleased to announce the Fortieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-26), which will be held in Singapore EXPO from January 20 to January 27, 2026.

poster

## Welcome to EMNLP 2024! 
We are excited to welcome you to one of the most prominent conferences in the field of Natural Language Processing. This year, EMNLP 2024 is being held in a hybrid format,
offering both virtual and in-person participation in beautiful Miami. Due to a record-breaking number of submissions, we've expanded the total number of accepted papers to accommodate more cutting-edge research from around the globe.
### [Conference Handbook](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WPROgxjLAC96AJL7Ugy0tEnYm7dkrbHt/view?usp=sharing)

You are required to register for this event. **Please register [here](https://2024.emnlp.org/registration/).** The EMNLP 2024 event page on Underline will be open to public one week prior to the event.

Please register!

EMNLP 2024 will take place in Miami, Florida from Nov 12th to Nov 16th, 2024, at the Hyatt Regency Miami Hote and on Underline for remote participants.

We introduce iterative retrieval, a novel framework that empowers retrievers to make iterative decisions through policy optimization. Finding an optimal portfolio of retrieved items is a combinatorial optimization problem, generally considered NP-hard. This approach provides a learned approximation to such a solution, meeting specific task requirements under a given family of large language models (LLMs). We propose a training procedure based on reinforcement learning, incorporating feedback from LLMs. We instantiate an iterative retriever for composing in-context learning (ICL) exemplars and apply it to various semantic parsing tasks that demand synthesized programs as outputs. By adding only 4M additional parameters for state encoding, we convert an off-the-shelf dense retriever into a stateful iterative retriever, outperforming previous methods in selecting ICL exemplars on semantic parsing datasets such as CalFlow, TreeDST, and MTOP. Additionally, the trained iterative retriever generalizes across different inference LLMs beyond the one used during training.

Learning to Retrieve Iteratively for In-Context Learning

In this paper, we investigate whether Large Language Models (LLMs) actively recall or retrieve their internal repositories of factual knowledge when faced with reasoning tasks. Through an analysis of LLMs' internal factual recall at each reasoning step via Knowledge Neurons, we reveal that LLMs fail to harness the critical factual associations under certain circumstances. Instead, they tend to opt for alternative, shortcut-like pathways to answer reasoning questions. By manually manipulating the recall process of parametric knowledge in LLMs, we demonstrate that enhancing this recall process directly improves reasoning performance whereas suppressing it leads to notable degradation. Furthermore, we assess the effect of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, a powerful technique for addressing complex reasoning tasks. Our findings indicate that CoT can intensify the recall of factual knowledge by encouraging LLMs to engage in orderly and reliable reasoning. Furthermore, we explored how contextual conflicts affect the retrieval of facts during the reasoning process to gain a comprehensive understanding of the factual recall behaviors of LLMs. Code and data will be available soon.

Unveiling Factual Recall Behaviors of Large Language Models through Knowledge Neurons

We present three innovations in tokenization and subword segmentation. First, we propose to use unsupervised morphological analysis with Morfessor as pre-tokenization. Second, we present an algebraic method for obtaining subword embeddings grounded in a word embedding space. Based on that, we design a novel subword segmentation algorithm that uses the embeddings, ensuring that the procedure considers lexical meaning. Third, we introduce an efficient segmentation algorithm based on a subword bigram model that can be initialized with the lexically aware segmentation method to avoid using Morfessor and large embedding tables at inference time. We evaluate the proposed approaches using two intrinsic metrics and measure their performance on two downstream tasks: part-of-speech tagging and machine translation. Our experiments show significant improvements in the morphological plausibility of the segmentation when evaluated using segmentation precision on morpheme boundaries and improved Rényi efficiency in 8 languages. Although the proposed tokenization methods do not have a large impact on automatic translation quality, we observe consistent performance gains in the arguably more morphological task of part-of-speech tagging.

Lexically Grounded Subword Segmentation

Recent studies highlight the effectiveness of using in-context learning (ICL) to steer large language models (LLMs) in processing tabular data, a challenging task given the structured nature of such data. Despite advancements in performance, the fairness implications of these methods are less understood. This study investigates how varying demonstrations within ICL prompts influence the fairness outcomes of LLMs. Our findings reveal that deliberately including minority group samples in prompts significantly boosts fairness without sacrificing predictive accuracy. Further experiments demonstrate that the proportion of minority to majority samples in demonstrations affects the trade-off between fairness and prediction accuracy. Based on these insights, we introduce a mitigation technique that employs clustering and evolutionary strategies to curate a diverse and representative sample set from the training data. This approach aims to enhance both predictive performance and fairness in ICL applications. Experimental results validate that our proposed method dramatically improves fairness across various metrics, showing its efficacy in real-world scenarios.

Strategic Demonstration Selection for Improved Fairness in LLM In-Context Learning

Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful zero-shot assessors used in real-world situations such as assessing written exams and benchmarking systems. Despite these critical applications, no existing work has analyzed the vulnerability of judge-LLMs to adversarial manipulation. This work presents the first study on the adversarial robustness of assessment LLMs, where we demonstrate that short universal adversarial phrases can be concatenated to deceive judge LLMs to predict inflated scores. Since adversaries may not know or have access to the judge-LLMs, we propose a simple surrogate attack where a surrogate model is first attacked, and the learned attack phrase then transferred to unknown judge-LLMs. We propose a practical algorithm to determine the short universal attack phrases and demonstrate that when transferred to unseen models, scores can be drastically inflated such that irrespective of the assessed text, maximum scores are predicted. It is found that judge-LLMs are significantly more susceptible to these adversarial attacks when used for absolute scoring, as opposed to comparative assessment. Our findings raise concerns on the reliability of LLM-as-a-judge methods, and emphasize the importance of addressing vulnerabilities in LLM assessment methods before deployment in high-stakes real-world scenarios.

Is LLM-as-a-Judge Robust? Investigating Universal Adversarial Attacks on Zero-shot LLM Assessment

Reasoning is one crucial capability in Large Language Models (LLMs), allowing them to perform complex tasks such as solving math problems and multi-step planning. While reasoning capability can emerge in larger models, smaller ones usually have to rely on distillation to transfer this capability from a larger model. However, recent efforts to distill reasoning capabilities have focused mainly on English, leaving multilingual distillation underexplored. To address this gap, this paper examines existing English reasoning distillation methods that utilize a variety of positive rationales in multilingual settings and proposes d-CoT-nR, a novel approach that incorporates incorrect rationales as additional guidance. Empirical results from multilingual high-school examinations show that d-CoT-nR significantly surpasses the baseline, improving accuracy in unseen languages and correctness in step-by-step reasoning.

An Empirical Study of Multilingual Reasoning Distillation for Question Answering

We posit that large language models (LLMs) should be capable of expressing their intrinsic uncertainty in natural language. For example, if the LLM is equally likely to output two contradicting answers to the same question, then its generated response should reflect this uncertainty by hedging its answer (e.g., "I’m not sure, but I think..."). We formalize faithful response uncertainty based on the gap between the model's intrinsic confidence in the assertions it makes and the decisiveness by which they are conveyed. This example-level metric reliably indicates whether the model reflects its uncertainty, as it penalizes both excessive and insufficient hedging. We evaluate a variety of aligned LLMs at faithfully conveying uncertainty on several knowledge-intensive question answering tasks. Our results provide strong evidence that modern LLMs are poor at faithfully conveying their uncertainty, and that better alignment is necessary to improve their trustworthiness.

Can Large Language Models Faithfully Express Their Intrinsic Uncertainty in Words?

Tools for translating natural language into code promise natural, open-ended interaction with databases, web APIs, and other software systems. However, this promise is complicated by the diversity and continual development of these systems, each with its own interface and distinct set of features. Building a new language-to-code translator, even starting with a large language model (LM), typically requires annotating a large set of natural language commands with their associated programs. In this paper, we describe ICIP (In-Context Inverse Programming), a method for bootstrapping a language-to-code system using mostly (or entirely) unlabeled programs written using a potentially unfamiliar (but human-readable) library or API. ICIP uses a pre-trained LM to assign candidate natural language descriptions to these programs, then iteratively refines the descriptions to ensure global consistency. Across nine different application domains from the Overnight and Spider benchmarks and text-davinci-003 and CodeLlama-7b-Instruct models, ICIP outperforms a number of prompting baselines. Indeed, in a “nearly unsupervised” setting with only a single annotated program and 100 unlabeled examples, it achieves up to 85% of the performance of a fully supervised system.

Language-to-Code Translation with a Single Labeled Example

LLMs can help humans working with long documents, but are known to hallucinate. *Attribution* can increase trust in LLM responses: The LLM provides evidence that supports its response, which enhances verifiability. Existing approaches to attribution have only been evaluated in RAG settings, where the initial retrieval confounds LLM performance. This is crucially different from the long document setting, where retrieval is not needed, but could help. Thus, a long document specific evaluation of attribution is missing. To fill this gap, we present LAB, a benchmark of 6 diverse long document tasks with attribution, and experiments with different approaches to attribution on 5 LLMs of different sizes. 

We find that *citation*, i.e. response generation and evidence extraction in one step, performs best for large and fine-tuned models, while additional retrieval can help for small, prompted models. We investigate whether the "Lost in the Middle'' phenomenon exists for attribution, but do not find this. We also find that evidence quality can predict response quality on datasets with simple responses, but not so for complex responses, as models struggle with providing evidence for complex claims. We release code and data for further investigation. [Link](https://github.com/UKPLab/arxiv2024-attribute-or-abstain)

Attribute or Abstain: Large Language Models as Long Document Assistants

Adopting human and large language models (LLM) as judges (*a.k.a* human- and LLM-as-a-judge) for evaluating the performance of LLMs has recently gained attention. Nonetheless, this approach concurrently introduces potential biases from human and LLMs, questioning the reliability of the evaluation results. In this paper, we propose a novel framework that is free from referencing groundtruth annotations for investigating **Misinformation Oversight Bias**, **Gender Bias**, **Authority Bias** and **Beauty Bias** on LLM and human judges. We curate a dataset referring to the revised Bloom's Taxonomy and conduct thousands of evaluations. Results show that human and LLM judges are vulnerable to perturbations to various degrees, and that even the cutting-edge judges possess considerable biases. We further exploit these biases to conduct attacks on LLM judges. We hope that our work can notify the community of the bias and vulnerability of human- and LLM-as-a-judge, as well as the urgency of developing robust evaluation systems.

Downloads

Next from EMNLP 2024

Learning to Retrieve Iteratively for In-Context Learning

Similar lecture

How Does Alignment Enhance LLMs’ Multilingual Capabilities? A Language Neurons Perspective