Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Oyvind Tafjord

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

12 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

12

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Answer, Assemble, Ace: Understanding How LMs Answer Multiple Choice Questions

  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Yonatan Belinkov
  • Hannaneh Hajishirzi
  • Ashish Sabharwal

Multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) is a key competence of performant transformer language models that is tested by mainstream benchmarks. However, recent evidence shows that models can have quite a range of performance, particularly when the task format is diversified slightly (such as by shuffling answer choice order). In this work we ask: how do successful models perform formatted MCQA? We employ vocabulary projection and activation patching methods to localize key hidden states that encode relevant information for predicting the correct answer. We find that prediction of a specific answer symbol is causally attributed to a few middle layers, and specifically their multi-head self-attention mechanisms. We show that subsequent layers increase the probability of the predicted answer symbol in vocabulary space, and that this probability increase is associated with a sparse set of attention heads with unique roles. We additionally uncover differences in how different models adjust to alternative symbols. Finally, we demonstrate that a synthetic task can disentangle sources of model error to pinpoint when a model has learned formatted MCQA, and show that logit differences between answer choice tokens continue to grow over the course of training.

ICML Conference 2025 Conference Paper

DataDecide: How to Predict Best Pretraining Data with Small Experiments

  • Ian Magnusson
  • Nguyen Tai
  • Ben Bogin
  • David Heineman
  • Jena D. Hwang
  • Luca Soldaini
  • Akshita Bhagia
  • Jiacheng Liu 0010

Because large language models are expensive to pretrain on different datasets, using smaller-scale experiments to decide on data is crucial for reducing costs. Which benchmarks and methods of making decisions from observed performance at small scale most accurately predict the datasets that yield the best large models? To empower open exploration of this question, we release models, data, and evaluations in DataDecide—the most extensive open suite of models over differences in data and scale. We conduct controlled pretraining experiments across 25 corpora with differing sources, deduplication, and filtering up to 100B tokens, model sizes up to 1B parameters, and 3 random seeds. We find that the ranking of models at a single, small size (e. g. , 150M parameters) is a strong baseline for predicting best models at our larger target scale (1B) ($\tilde$ 80% of comparisons correct). No scaling law methods among 8 baselines exceed the compute-decision frontier of single-scale predictions, but DataDecide can measure improvement in future scaling laws. We also identify that using continuous likelihood metrics as proxies in small experiments makes benchmarks including MMLU, ARC, HellaSwag, MBPP, and HumanEval $>$ 80% predictable at the target 1B scale with just 0. 01% of the compute.

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

From Models to Microtheories: Distilling a Model's Topical Knowledge for Grounded Question-Answering

  • Nathaniel Weir
  • Bhavana Dalvi Mishra
  • Orion Weller
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Sam Hornstein
  • Alexander Sabol
  • Peter A. Jansen
  • Benjamin Van Durme

Recent reasoning methods (e.g., chain-of-thought) help users understand how language models (LMs) answer a single question, but they do little to reveal the LM’s overall understanding, or “theory,” about the question’s topic, making it still hard to trust the model. Our goal is to materialize such theories - here called microtheories (a linguistic analog of logical microtheories) - as a set of sentences encapsulating an LM’s core knowledge about a topic. These statements systematically work together to entail answers to a set of questions to both engender trust and improve performance. Our approach is to first populate a knowledge store with (model-generated) sentences that entail answers to training questions, and then distill those down to a core microtheory which is concise, general, and non-redundant. We show that, when added to a general corpus (e.g., Wikipedia), microtheories can supply critical information not necessarily present in the corpus, improving both a model’s ability to ground its answers to verifiable knowledge (i.e., show how answers are systematically entailed by documents in the corpus, grounding up to +8% more answers), and the accuracy of those grounded answers (up to +8% absolute). We also show that, in a human evaluation in the medical domain, our distilled microtheories contain a significantly higher concentration of topically critical facts than the non-distilled knowledge store. Finally, we show we can quantify the coverage of a microtheory for a topic (characterized by a dataset) using a notion of p-relevance. Together, these suggest that microtheories are an efficient distillation of an LM’s topic-relevant knowledge, that they can usefully augment existing corpora, and can provide both performance gains and an interpretable, verifiable window into the model’s knowledge of a topic.

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

OLMoE: Open Mixture-of-Experts Language Models

  • Niklas Muennighoff
  • Luca Soldaini
  • Dirk Groeneveld
  • Kyle Lo
  • Jacob Morrison
  • Sewon Min
  • Weijia Shi
  • Evan Pete Walsh

We introduce OLMoE, a fully open, state-of-the-art language model leveraging sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE). OLMoE-1B-7B has 7 billion (B) parameters but uses only 1B per input token. We pretrain it on 5 trillion tokens and further adapt it to create OLMoE-1B-7B-Instruct. Our models outperform all available models with similar active parameters, even surpassing larger ones like Llama2-13B-Chat and DeepSeekMoE-16B. We present novel findings on MoE training, define and analyze new routing properties showing high specialization in our model, and open-source all our work: model weights, training data, code, and logs.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

DiscoveryWorld: A Virtual Environment for Developing and Evaluating Automated Scientific Discovery Agents

  • Peter Jansen
  • Marc-Alexandre Côté
  • Tushar Khot
  • Erin Bransom
  • Bhavana Dalvi Mishra
  • Bodhisattwa Prasad Majumder
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Peter Clark

Automated scientific discovery promises to accelerate progress across scientific domains, but evaluating an agent's capacity for end-to-end scientific reasoning is challenging as running real-world experiments is often prohibitively expensive or infeasible. In this work we introduce DiscoveryWorld, a virtual environment that enables benchmarking an agent's ability to perform complete cycles of novel scientific discovery in an inexpensive, simulated, multi-modal, long-horizon, and fictional setting. DiscoveryWorld consists of 24 scientific tasks across three levels of difficulty, each with parametric variations that provide new discoveries for agents to make across runs. Tasks require an agent to form hypotheses, design and run experiments, analyze results, and act on conclusions. Task difficulties are normed to range from straightforward to challenging for human scientists with advanced degrees. DiscoveryWorld further provides three automatic metrics for evaluating performance, including: (1) binary task completion, (2) fine-grained report cards detailing procedural scoring of task-relevant actions, and (3) the accuracy of discovered explanatory knowledge. While simulated environments such as DiscoveryWorld are low-fidelity compared to the real world, we find that strong baseline agents struggle on most DiscoveryWorld tasks, highlighting the utility of using simulated environments as proxy tasks for near-term development of scientific discovery competency in agents.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Paloma: A Benchmark for Evaluating Language Model Fit

  • Ian Magnusson
  • Akshita Bhagia
  • Valentin Hofmann
  • Luca Soldaini
  • Ananya H. Jha
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Dustin Schwenk
  • Evan P. Walsh

Evaluations of language models (LMs) commonly report perplexity on monolithic data held out from training. Implicitly or explicitly, this data is composed of domains—varying distributions of language. We introduce Perplexity Analysis for Language Model Assessment (Paloma), a benchmark to measure LM fit to 546 English and code domains, instead of assuming perplexity on one distribution extrapolates to others. We include two new datasets of the top 100 subreddits (e. g. , r/depression on Reddit) and programming languages (e. g. , Java on GitHub), both sources common in contemporary LMs. With our benchmark, we release 6 baseline 1B LMs carefully controlled to provide fair comparisons about which pretraining corpus is best and code for others to apply those controls to their own experiments. Our case studies demonstrate how the fine-grained results from Paloma surface findings such as that models pretrained without data beyond Common Crawl exhibit anomalous gaps in LM fit to many domains or that loss is dominated by the most frequently occurring strings in the vocabulary.

NeurIPS Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Learn to Explain: Multimodal Reasoning via Thought Chains for Science Question Answering

  • Pan Lu
  • Swaroop Mishra
  • Tanglin Xia
  • Liang Qiu
  • Kai-Wei Chang
  • Song-Chun Zhu
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Peter Clark

When answering a question, humans utilize the information available across different modalities to synthesize a consistent and complete chain of thought (CoT). This process is normally a black box in the case of deep learning models like large-scale language models. Recently, science question benchmarks have been used to diagnose the multi-hop reasoning ability and interpretability of an AI system. However, existing datasets fail to provide annotations for the answers, or are restricted to the textual-only modality, small scales, and limited domain diversity. To this end, we present Science Question Answering (ScienceQA), a new benchmark that consists of ~21k multimodal multiple choice questions with a diverse set of science topics and annotations of their answers with corresponding lectures and explanations. We further design language models to learn to generate lectures and explanations as the chain of thought (CoT) to mimic the multi-hop reasoning process when answering ScienceQA questions. ScienceQA demonstrates the utility of CoT in language models, as CoT improves the question answering performance by 1. 20% in few-shot GPT-3 and 3. 99% in fine-tuned UnifiedQA. We also explore the upper bound for models to leverage explanations by feeding those in the input; we observe that it improves the few-shot performance of GPT-3 by 18. 96%. Our analysis further shows that language models, similar to humans, benefit from explanations to learn from fewer data and achieve the same performance with just 40% of the data. The data and code are available at https: //scienceqa. github. io.

NeurIPS Conference 2020 Conference Paper

Leap-Of-Thought: Teaching Pre-Trained Models to Systematically Reason Over Implicit Knowledge

  • Alon Talmor
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Peter Clark
  • Yoav Goldberg
  • Jonathan Berant

To what extent can a neural network systematically reason over symbolic facts? Evidence suggests that large pre-trained language models (LMs) acquire some reasoning capacity, but this ability is difficult to control. Recently, it has been shown that Transformer-based models succeed in consistent reasoning over explicit symbolic facts, under a "closed-world" assumption. However, in an open-domain setup, it is desirable to tap into the vast reservoir of implicit knowledge already encoded in the parameters of pre-trained LMs. In this work, we provide a first demonstration that LMs can be trained to reliably perform systematic reasoning combining both implicit, pre-trained knowledge and explicit natural language statements. To do this, we describe a procedure for automatically generating datasets that teach a model new reasoning skills, and demonstrate that models learn to effectively perform inference which involves implicit taxonomic and world knowledge, chaining and counting. Finally, we show that "teaching" models to reason generalizes beyond the training distribution: they successfully compose the usage of multiple reasoning skills in single examples. Our work paves a path towards open-domain systems that constantly improve by interacting with users who can instantly correct a model by adding simple natural language statements.

IJCAI Conference 2020 Conference Paper

Transformers as Soft Reasoners over Language

  • Peter Clark
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Kyle Richardson

Beginning with McCarthy's Advice Taker (1959), AI has pursued the goal of providing a system with explicit, general knowledge and having the system reason over that knowledge. However, expressing the knowledge in a formal (logical or probabilistic) representation has been a major obstacle to this research. This paper investigates a modern approach to this problem where the facts and rules are provided as natural language sentences, thus bypassing a formal representation. We train transformers to reason (or emulate reasoning) over these sentences using synthetically generated data. Our models, that we call RuleTakers, provide the first empirical demonstration that this kind of soft reasoning over language is learnable, can achieve high (99%) accuracy, and generalizes to test data requiring substantially deeper chaining than seen during training (95%+ scores). We also demonstrate that the models transfer well to two hand-authored rulebases, and to rulebases paraphrased into more natural language. These findings are significant as it suggests a new role for transformers, namely as limited "soft theorem provers" operating over explicit theories in language. This in turn suggests new possibilities for explainability, correctability, and counterfactual reasoning in question-answering.

AAAI Conference 2019 Conference Paper

Declarative Question Answering over Knowledge Bases Containing Natural Language Text with Answer Set Programming

  • Arindam Mitra
  • Peter Clark
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Chitta Baral

While in recent years machine learning (ML) based approaches have been the popular approach in developing endto-end question answering systems, such systems often struggle when additional knowledge is needed to correctly answer the questions. Proposed alternatives involve translating the question and the natural language text to a logical representation and then use logical reasoning. However, this alternative falters when the size of the text gets bigger. To address this we propose an approach that does logical reasoning over premises written in natural language text. The proposed method uses recent features of Answer Set Programming (ASP) to call external NLP modules (which may be based on ML) which perform simple textual entailment. To test our approach we develop a corpus based on the life cycle questions and showed that Our system achieves up to 18% performance gain when compared to standard MCQ solvers.

AAAI Conference 2019 Conference Paper

QUAREL: A Dataset and Models for Answering Questions about Qualitative Relationships

  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Peter Clark
  • Matt Gardner
  • Wen-tau Yih
  • Ashish Sabharwal

Many natural language questions require recognizing and reasoning with qualitative relationships (e. g. , in science, economics, and medicine), but are challenging to answer with corpus-based methods. Qualitative modeling provides tools that support such reasoning, but the semantic parsing task of mapping questions into those models has formidable challenges. We present QUAREL, a dataset of diverse story questions involving qualitative relationships that characterize these challenges, and techniques that begin to address them. The dataset has 2771 questions relating 19 different types of quantities. For example, “Jenny observes that the robot vacuum cleaner moves slower on the living room carpet than on the bedroom carpet. Which carpet has more friction? ” We contribute (1) a simple and flexible conceptual framework for representing these kinds of questions; (2) the QUAREL dataset, including logical forms, exemplifying the parsing challenges; and (3) two novel models for this task, built as extensions of type-constrained semantic parsing. The first of these models (called QUASP+) significantly outperforms off-the-shelf tools on QUAREL. The second (QUASP+ZERO) demonstrates zero-shot capability, i. e. , the ability to handle new qualitative relationships without requiring additional training data, something not possible with previous models. This work thus makes inroads into answering complex, qualitative questions that require reasoning, and scaling to new relationships at low cost. The dataset and models are available at http: //data. allenai. org/quarel.

AAAI Conference 2016 Conference Paper

Combining Retrieval, Statistics, and Inference to Answer Elementary Science Questions

  • Peter Clark
  • Oren Etzioni
  • Tushar Khot
  • Ashish Sabharwal
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Peter Turney
  • Daniel Khashabi

What capabilities are required for an AI system to pass standard 4th Grade Science Tests? Previous work has examined the use of Markov Logic Networks (MLNs) to represent the requisite background knowledge and interpret test questions, but did not improve upon an information retrieval (IR) baseline. In this paper, we describe an alternative approach that operates at three levels of representation and reasoning: information retrieval, corpus statistics, and simple inference over a semi-automatically constructed knowledge base, to achieve substantially improved results. We evaluate the methods on six years of unseen, unedited exam questions from the NY Regents Science Exam (using only non-diagram, multiple choice questions), and show that our overall system’s score is 71. 3%, an improvement of 23. 8% (absolute) over the MLN-based method described in previous work. We conclude with a detailed analysis, illustrating the complementary strengths of each method in the ensemble. Our datasets are being released to enable further research.

v2026.09.13