Adapting Open-Source LLMs for Contract Drafting and Analyzing Multi-Role vs. Single-Role Behavior of ChatGPT for Synthetic Data Generation | Proceedings of the Third International Conference on AI-ML Systems (2024)

1. 2023. bitsandbytes slow inference issue. https://github.com/TimDettmers/bitsandbytes/issues/388.Google Scholar
2. 2023. GitHub - databrickslabs/dolly: Databricks’ Dolly, a large language model trained on the Databricks Machine Learning Platform — github.com. https://github.com/databrickslabs/dolly.Google Scholar
3. 2023. Introducing ChatGPT — openai.com. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt.Google Scholar
4. 2023. NousResearch/Nous-Hermes-13b. https://huggingface.co/NousResearch/Nous-Hermes-13b.Google Scholar
5. Vinay Aggarwal, Aparna Garimella, BalajiVasan Srinivasan, Rajiv Jain, 2021. CLAUSEREC: A Clause Recommendation Framework for AI-aided Contract Authoring. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.15794 (2021).Google Scholar
6. StephenH Bach, Victor Sanh, Zheng-Xin Yong, Albert Webson, Colin Raffel, NihalV Nayak, Abheesht Sharma, Taewoon Kim, MSaiful Bari, Thibault Fevry, 2022. Promptsource: An integrated development environment and repository for natural language prompts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.01279 (2022).Google Scholar
7. Yuntao Bai, Saurav Kadavath, Sandipan Kundu, Amanda Askell, Jackson Kernion, Andy Jones, Anna Chen, Anna Goldie, Azalia Mirhoseini, Cameron McKinnon, 2022. Constitutional ai: Harmlessness from ai feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.08073 (2022).Google Scholar
8. Łukasz Borchmann, Dawid Wiśniewski, Andrzej Gretkowski, Izabela Kosmala, Dawid Jurkiewicz, Łukasz Szałkiewicz, Gabriela Pałka, Karol Kaczmarek, Agnieszka Kaliska, and Filip Graliński. 2019. Contract discovery: Dataset and a few-shot semantic retrieval challenge with competitive baselines. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.03911 (2019).Google Scholar
9. Ilias Chalkidis, Manos Fergadiotis, Prodromos Malakasiotis, Nikolaos Aletras, and Ion Androutsopoulos. 2020. LEGAL-BERT: The muppets straight out of law school. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02559 (2020).Google Scholar
10. PaulF Christiano, Jan Leike, Tom Brown, Miljan Martic, Shane Legg, and Dario Amodei. 2017. Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).Google Scholar
11. HyungWon Chung, Le Hou, Shayne Longpre, Barret Zoph, Yi Tay, William Fedus, Eric Li, Xuezhi Wang, Mostafa Dehghani, Siddhartha Brahma, 2022. Scaling instruction-finetuned language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.11416 (2022).Google Scholar
12. Leo Gao, John Schulman, and Jacob Hilton. 2023. Scaling laws for reward model overoptimization. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 10835–10866.Google Scholar
13. Demi Guo, AlexanderM Rush, and Yoon Kim. 2020. Parameter-efficient transfer learning with diff pruning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2012.07463 (2020).Google Scholar
14. Neil Houlsby, Andrei Giurgiu, Stanislaw Jastrzebski, Bruna Morrone, Quentin DeLaroussilhe, Andrea Gesmundo, Mona Attariyan, and Sylvain Gelly. 2019. Parameter-efficient transfer learning for NLP. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2790–2799.Google Scholar
15. EdwardJ Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, and Weizhu Chen. 2021. Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.09685 (2021).Google Scholar
16. Sagar Joshi, Sumanth Balaji, Aparna Garimella, and Vasudeva Varma. 2022. Graph-based Keyword Planning for Legal Clause Generation from Topics. In Proceedings of the Natural Legal Language Processing Workshop 2022. Association for Computational Linguistics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (Hybrid), 276–286. https://aclanthology.org/2022.nllp-1.26Google ScholarCross Ref
17. Jaehun Jung, Lianhui Qin, Sean Welleck, Faeze Brahman, Chandra Bhagavatula, RonanLe Bras, and Yejin Choi. 2022. Maieutic prompting: Logically consistent reasoning with recursive explanations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.11822 (2022).Google Scholar
18. NitishShirish Keskar, Bryan McCann, LavR Varshney, Caiming Xiong, and Richard Socher. 2019. Ctrl: A conditional transformer language model for controllable generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.05858 (2019).Google Scholar
19. Nikita Kitaev, Steven Cao, and Dan Klein. 2018. Multilingual constituency parsing with self-attention and pre-training. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.11760 (2018).Google Scholar
20. Nikita Kitaev and Dan Klein. 2018. Constituency parsing with a self-attentive encoder. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.01052 (2018).Google Scholar
21. Takeshi Kojima, ShixiangShane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. 2022. Large language models are zero-shot reasoners. Advances in neural information processing systems 35 (2022), 22199–22213.Google Scholar
22. Spyretta Leivaditi, Julien Rossi, and Evangelos Kanoulas. 2020. A benchmark for lease contract review. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.10386 (2020).Google Scholar
23. Patrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni, Vladimir Karpukhin, Naman Goyal, Heinrich Küttler, Mike Lewis, Wen-tau Yih, Tim Rocktäschel, 2020. Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledge-intensive nlp tasks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 (2020), 9459–9474.Google Scholar
24. XiangLisa Li and Percy Liang. 2021. Prefix-tuning: Optimizing continuous prompts for generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.00190 (2021).Google Scholar
25. Chin-Yew Lin. 2004. ROUGE: A Package for Automatic Evaluation of Summaries. In Text Summarization Branches Out. Association for Computational Linguistics, Barcelona, Spain, 74–81. https://aclanthology.org/W04-1013Google Scholar
26. Jiacheng Liu, Alisa Liu, Ximing Lu, Sean Welleck, Peter West, RonanLe Bras, Yejin Choi, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2021. Generated knowledge prompting for commonsense reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.08387 (2021).Google Scholar
27. Xiao Liu, Yanan Zheng, Zhengxiao Du, Ming Ding, Yujie Qian, Zhilin Yang, and Jie Tang. 2021. GPT understands, too. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.10385 (2021).Google Scholar
28. Jieyi Long. 2023. Large Language Model Guided Tree-of-Thought. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.08291 (2023).Google Scholar
29. Aman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan, Luyu Gao, Sarah Wiegreffe, Uri Alon, Nouha Dziri, Shrimai Prabhumoye, Yiming Yang, Shashank Gupta, BodhisattwaPrasad Majumder, Katherine Hermann, Sean Welleck, Amir Yazdanbakhsh, and Peter Clark. 2023. Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback. arXiv:arXiv:2303.17651Google Scholar
30. Sewon Min, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2021. Metaicl: Learning to learn in context. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.15943 (2021).Google Scholar
31. Swaroop Mishra, Daniel Khashabi, Chitta Baral, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2021. Cross-task generalization via natural language crowdsourcing instructions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.08773 (2021).Google Scholar
32. OpenAI. 2023. GPT-4 Technical Report. arXiv:arXiv:2303.08774Google Scholar
33. Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, 2022. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 27730–27744.Google Scholar
34. Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu. 2002. Bleu: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 311–318. https://doi.org/10.3115/1073083.1073135Google ScholarDigital Library
35. Baolin Peng, Chunyuan Li, Pengcheng He, Michel Galley, and Jianfeng Gao. 2023. Instruction tuning with gpt-4. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.03277 (2023).Google Scholar
36. Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, Rewon Child, David Luan, Dario Amodei, Ilya Sutskever, 2019. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog 1, 8 (2019), 9.Google Scholar
37. Victor Sanh, Albert Webson, Colin Raffel, StephenH Bach, Lintang Sutawika, Zaid Alyafeai, Antoine Chaffin, Arnaud Stiegler, TevenLe Scao, Arun Raja, 2021. Multitask prompted training enables zero-shot task generalization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.08207 (2021).Google Scholar
38. John Schulman, Barret Zoph, Christina Kim, Jacob Hilton, Jacob Menick, Jiayi Weng, Juan FelipeCeron Uribe, Liam Fedus, Luke Metz, Michael Pokorny, 2022. ChatGPT: Optimizing language models for dialogue. OpenAI blog (2022).Google Scholar
39. Nisan Stiennon, Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Daniel Ziegler, Ryan Lowe, Chelsea Voss, Alec Radford, Dario Amodei, and PaulF Christiano. 2020. Learning to summarize with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 (2020), 3008–3021.Google Scholar
40. Rohan Taori, Ishaan Gulrajani, Tianyi Zhang, Yann Dubois, Xuechen Li, Carlos Guestrin, Percy Liang, and TatsunoriB Hashimoto. 2023. Stanford alpaca: An instruction-following llama model.Google Scholar
41. Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, 2023. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971 (2023).Google Scholar
42. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, AidanN Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).Google Scholar
43. Yizhong Wang, Yeganeh Kordi, Swaroop Mishra, Alisa Liu, NoahA Smith, Daniel Khashabi, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2022. Self-instruct: Aligning language model with self generated instructions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10560 (2022).Google Scholar
44. Yizhong Wang, Swaroop Mishra, Pegah Alipoormolabashi, Yeganeh Kordi, Amirreza Mirzaei, Anjana Arunkumar, Arjun Ashok, ArutSelvan Dhanasekaran, Atharva Naik, David Stap, 2022. Super-naturalinstructions: Generalization via declarative instructions on 1600+ nlp tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.07705 (2022).Google Scholar
45. Jason Wei, Maarten Bosma, VincentY Zhao, Kelvin Guu, AdamsWei Yu, Brian Lester, Nan Du, AndrewM Dai, and QuocV Le. 2021. Finetuned language models are zero-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.01652 (2021).Google Scholar
46. Tongshuang Wu, Ellen Jiang, Aaron Donsbach, Jeff Gray, Alejandra Molina, Michael Terry, and CarrieJ Cai. 2022. Promptchainer: Chaining large language model prompts through visual programming. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts. 1–10.Google ScholarDigital Library
47. Shunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran, ThomasL Griffiths, Yuan Cao, and Karthik Narasimhan. 2023. Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10601 (2023).Google Scholar
48. EladBen Zaken, Shauli Ravfogel, and Yoav Goldberg. 2021. Bitfit: Simple parameter-efficient fine-tuning for transformer-based masked language-models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.10199 (2021).Google Scholar
49. Haoxi Zhong, Chaojun Xiao, Cunchao Tu, Tianyang Zhang, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2020. How does NLP benefit legal system: A summary of legal artificial intelligence. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.12158 (2020).Google Scholar
50. Denny Zhou, Nathanael Schärli, Le Hou, Jason Wei, Nathan Scales, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Olivier Bousquet, Quoc Le, and Ed Chi. 2022. Least-to-most prompting enables complex reasoning in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.10625 (2022).Google Scholar

Index Terms

1. Adapting Open-Source LLMs for Contract Drafting and Analyzing Multi-Role vs. Single-Role Behavior of ChatGPT for Synthetic Data Generation

   1. Computing methodologies

      1. Artificial intelligence

         1. Natural language processing

            1. Natural language generation

• Read More

• Improving theReadability ofGenerated Tests Using GPT-4 andChatGPT Code Interpreter

  Search-Based Software Engineering

  Abstract

  A major challenge in automated test generation is the readability of generated tests. Emerging large language models (LLMs) excel at language analysis and transformation tasks. We propose that improving test readability is such a task and explore ...

  Read More

• Instructor Perceptions of AI Code Generation Tools - A Multi-Institutional Interview Study

  SIGCSE 2024: Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1

  Much of the recent work investigating large language models and AI Code Generation tools in computing education has focused on assessing their capabilities for solving typical programming problems and for generating resources such as code explanations ...

  Read More

  See Also

  Kongresskalender - A&I Online - Anästhesiologie & Intensivmedizin