Although large language models (LLMs) exhibit remarkable capacity to leverage in-context demonstrations, it is still unclear to what extent they can learn new facts or concept definitions via prompts. To address this question, we examine the capacity of instruction-tuned LLMs to follow in-context concept annotation guidelines for zero-shot sentence labeling tasks. We design guidelines that present different types of factual and counterfactual concept definitions, which are used as prompts for zero-shot sentence classification tasks. Our results show that although concept definitions consistently help in task performance, only the larger models (with 70B parameters or more) have limited ability to work under counterfactual contexts. Importantly, only proprietary models such as GPT-3.5 can recognize nonsensical guidelines, which we hypothesize is due to more sophisticated alignment methods. Finally, we find that Falcon-180B-chat is outperformed by Llama-2-70B-chat is most cases, which indicates that increasing model scale does not guarantee better adherence to guidelines. Altogether, our simple evaluation method reveals significant gaps in concept understanding between the most capable open-source language models and the leading proprietary APIs.

In this work, we investigate the controllability of large language models (LLMs) on scientific summarization tasks. We identify key stylistic and content coverage factors that characterize different types of summaries such as paper reviews, abstracts, and lay summaries. By controlling stylistic features, we find that non-fine-tuned LLMs outperform humans in the MuP review generation task, both in terms of similarity to reference summaries and human preferences. Also, we show that we can improve the controllability of LLMs with keyword-based classifier-free guidance (CFG) while achieving lexical overlap comparable to strong fine-tuned baselines on arXiv and PubMed. However, our results also indicate that LLMs cannot consistently generate long summaries with more than 8 sentences. Furthermore, these models exhibit limited capacity to produce highly abstractive lay summaries. Although LLMs demonstrate strong generic summarization competency, sophisticated content control without costly fine-tuning remains an open problem for domain-specific applications.

Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with complex logical reasoning due to logical inconsistencies and the inherent difficulty ofsuch reasoning. We use Lean, a theorem proving framework, to address these challenges. By formalizing logical reasoning problems intotheorems within Lean, we can solve them by proving or disproving the corresponding theorems. This method reduces the risk of logical inconsistencies with the help of Lean’s symbolic solver. It also enhances our ability to treat complex reasoning tasks using Lean’s extensive library of theorem proofs. Our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on the FOLIO dataset and achieves performance near this level on ProofWriter. Notably, these results were accomplished by fine-tuning on fewer than 100 in-domain samples for each dataset

We argue that disentangling content selection from the budget used to cover salient content improves the performance and applicability of abstractive summarizers. Our method, FactorSum, does this disentanglement by factorizing summarization into two steps through an energy function: (1) generation of abstractive summary views covering salient information in subsets of the input document (document views); (2) combination of these views into a final summary, following a budget and content guidance. This guidance may come from different sources, including from an advisor model such as BART or BigBird, or in oracle mode – from the reference. This factorization achieves significantly higher ROUGE scores on multiple benchmarks for long document summarization, namely PubMed, arXiv, and GovReport. Most notably, our model is effective for domain adaptation. When trained only on PubMed samples, it achieves a 46.29 ROUGE-1 score on arXiv, outperforming PEGASUS trained in domain by a large margin. Our experimental results indicate that the performance gains are due to more flexible budget adaptation and processing of shorter contexts provided by partial document views.