new

Get trending papers in your email inbox!

Subscribe

Daily Papers

byAK and the research community

Oct 24

MoME: Mixture of Matryoshka Experts for Audio-Visual Speech Recognition

Large language models (LLMs) have recently shown strong potential in audio-visual speech recognition (AVSR), but their high computational demands and sensitivity to token granularity limit their practicality in resource-constrained settings. Token compression methods can reduce inference cost, but they require fixing a compression rate in advance and produce a single fixed-length output, offering no flexibility to balance information density and efficiency at inference time. Matryoshka representation learning (MRL) addresses this by enabling a single model to operate across multiple token granularities, allowing compression rates to be adjusted dynamically. However, current MRL-based methods treat each scale independently during training, limiting cross-scale generalization, robustness at high compression, and interpretability. To overcome these limitations, we propose MoME (Mixture of Matryoshka Experts), a novel framework that integrates sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) into MRL-based LLMs for AVSR. MoME augments a frozen LLM with top-k routed and shared experts, allowing dynamic capacity allocation across scales and modalities. A shared router promotes consistent expert activation across granularities, enabling compressed sequences to benefit from representations learned at lower compression. Experiments on LRS2 and LRS3 demonstrate that MoME achieves state-of-the-art performance across AVSR, ASR, and VSR tasks, while requiring significantly fewer parameters and maintaining robustness under noise. MoME unifies the adaptability of MRL with the efficiency of MoE, offering a scalable and interpretable solution for resource-aware speech recognition.

SciBench: Evaluating College-Level Scientific Problem-Solving Abilities of Large Language Models

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated notable progress on many mathematical benchmarks. However, most of these benchmarks only feature problems grounded in junior and senior high school subjects, contain only multiple-choice questions, and are confined to a limited scope of elementary arithmetic operations. To address these issues, this paper introduces an expansive benchmark suite SciBench that aims to systematically examine the reasoning capabilities required for complex scientific problem solving. SciBench contains two carefully curated datasets: an open set featuring a range of collegiate-level scientific problems drawn from mathematics, chemistry, and physics textbooks, and a closed set comprising problems from undergraduate-level exams in computer science and mathematics. Based on the two datasets, we conduct an in-depth benchmark study of two representative LLMs with various prompting strategies. The results reveal that current LLMs fall short of delivering satisfactory performance, with an overall score of merely 35.80%. Furthermore, through a detailed user study, we categorize the errors made by LLMs into ten problem-solving abilities. Our analysis indicates that no single prompting strategy significantly outperforms others and some strategies that demonstrate improvements in certain problem-solving skills result in declines in other skills. We envision that SciBench will catalyze further developments in the reasoning abilities of LLMs, thereby ultimately contributing to scientific research and discovery.

  • 10 authors
·
Jul 20, 2023

CLR-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models in College-level Reasoning

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated their remarkable performance across various language understanding tasks. While emerging benchmarks have been proposed to evaluate LLMs in various domains such as mathematics and computer science, they merely measure the accuracy in terms of the final prediction on multi-choice questions. However, it remains insufficient to verify the essential understanding of LLMs given a chosen choice. To fill this gap, we present CLR-Bench to comprehensively evaluate the LLMs in complex college-level reasoning. Specifically, (i) we prioritize 16 challenging college disciplines in computer science and artificial intelligence. The dataset contains 5 types of questions, while each question is associated with detailed explanations from experts. (ii) To quantify a fair evaluation of LLMs' reasoning ability, we formalize the criteria with two novel metrics. QrightarrowA is utilized to measure the performance of direct answer prediction, and QrightarrowAR effectively considers the joint ability to answer the question and provide rationale simultaneously. Extensive experiments are conducted with 40 LLMs over 1,018 discipline-specific questions. The results demonstrate the key insights that LLMs, even the best closed-source LLM, i.e., GPT-4 turbo, tend to `guess' the college-level answers. It shows a dramatic decrease in accuracy from 63.31% QrightarrowA to 39.00% QrightarrowAR, indicating an unsatisfactory reasoning ability.

  • 6 authors
·
Oct 23, 2024