An Empirical Study of Validating Synthetic Data for Formula Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.10657v3
• Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2024 12:44:42 GMT
• Title: An Empirical Study of Validating Synthetic Data for Formula Generation
• Authors: Usneek Singh, José Cambronero, Sumit Gulwani, Aditya Kanade, Anirudh Khatry, Vu Le, Mukul Singh, Gust Verbruggen,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) can be leveraged to help with writing formulas in spreadsheets. We use a(nother) model to generate synthetic natural language utterances for fine-tuning. We demonstrate that validation improves performance over raw data across four models.
• Score: 16.284825301335623
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can be leveraged to help with writing formulas in spreadsheets, but resources on these formulas are scarce, impacting both the base performance of pre-trained models and limiting the ability to fine-tune them. Given a corpus of formulas, we can use a(nother) model to generate synthetic natural language utterances for fine-tuning. However, it is important to validate whether the NL generated by the LLM is indeed accurate to be beneficial for fine-tuning. In this paper, we provide empirical results on the impact of validating these synthetic training examples with surrogate objectives that evaluate the accuracy of the synthetic annotations. We demonstrate that validation improves performance over raw data across four models (2 open and 2 closed weight). Interestingly, we show that although validation tends to prune more challenging examples, it increases the complexity of problems that models can solve after being fine-tuned on validated data.

Related papers

• Subtle Errors Matter: Preference Learning via Error-injected Self-editing [59.405145971637204]
  We propose a novel preference learning framework called eRror-Injected Self-Editing (RISE) RISE injects predefined subtle errors into partial tokens of correct solutions to construct hard pairs for error mitigation. Experiments validate the effectiveness of RISE, with preference learning on Qwen2-7B-Instruct yielding notable improvements of 3.0% on GSM8K and 7.9% on MATH.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T07:43:38Z)
• RL on Incorrect Synthetic Data Scales the Efficiency of LLM Math Reasoning by Eight-Fold [41.28168368547099]
  Training on model-generated synthetic data is a promising approach for finetuning LLMs, but it remains unclear when it helps or hurts. We show that training on per-step negatives can help to unlearn spurious correlations in the positive data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:45:54Z)
• Unveiling the Flaws: Exploring Imperfections in Synthetic Data and Mitigation Strategies for Large Language Models [89.88010750772413]
  Synthetic data has been proposed as a solution to address the issue of high-quality data scarcity in the training of large language models (LLMs) Our work delves into these specific flaws associated with question-answer (Q-A) pairs, a prevalent type of synthetic data, and presents a method based on unlearning techniques to mitigate these flaws. Our work has yielded key insights into the effective use of synthetic data, aiming to promote more robust and efficient LLM training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T08:38:59Z)
• Beyond Model Collapse: Scaling Up with Synthesized Data Requires Verification [11.6055501181235]
  We investigate the use of verification on synthesized data to prevent model collapse. We show that verifiers, even imperfect ones, can indeed be harnessed to prevent model collapse.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T17:46:16Z)
• Beyond Human Data: Scaling Self-Training for Problem-Solving with Language Models [115.501751261878]
  Fine-tuning language models(LMs) on human-generated data remains a prevalent practice. We investigate whether we can go beyond human data on tasks where we have access to scalar feedback. We find that ReST$EM$ scales favorably with model size and significantly surpasses fine-tuning only on human data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-11T18:17:43Z)
• Correcting Diverse Factual Errors in Abstractive Summarization via Post-Editing and Language Model Infilling [56.70682379371534]
  We show that our approach vastly outperforms prior methods in correcting erroneous summaries. Our model -- FactEdit -- improves factuality scores by over 11 points on CNN/DM and over 31 points on XSum.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-22T07:16:19Z)
• FairIF: Boosting Fairness in Deep Learning via Influence Functions with Validation Set Sensitive Attributes [51.02407217197623]
  We propose a two-stage training algorithm named FAIRIF. It minimizes the loss over the reweighted data set where the sample weights are computed. We show that FAIRIF yields models with better fairness-utility trade-offs against various types of bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-15T05:14:48Z)
• Annotating and Modeling Fine-grained Factuality in Summarization [36.88018450067003]
  A major barrier to their use in practice is their propensity to output summaries that are not faithful to the input and that contain factual errors. We explore both synthetic and human-labeled data sources for training models to identify factual errors in summarization. We show that our best factuality detection model enables training of more factual XSum summarization models by allowing us to identify non-factual tokens in the training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-09T11:20:44Z)
• Exposing Shallow Heuristics of Relation Extraction Models with Challenge Data [49.378860065474875]
  We identify failure modes of SOTA relation extraction (RE) models trained on TACRED. By adding some of the challenge data as training examples, the performance of the model improves.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-07T21:17:25Z)
• Elastic weight consolidation for better bias inoculation [24.12790037712358]
  Elastic weight consolidation (EWC) allows fine-tuning of models to mitigate biases. EWC dominates standard fine-tuning, yielding models with lower levels of forgetting on the original (biased) dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-29T17:45:12Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.