Christopher D Manning

Christopher D Manning

Stanford University

H-index: 158

North America-United States

Professor Information

University

Stanford University

Position

Professor of Computer Science and Linguistics

Citations(all)

236817

Citations(since 2020)

128611

Cited By

159286

hIndex(all)

158

hIndex(since 2020)

109

i10Index(all)

400

i10Index(since 2020)

309

Email

University Profile Page

Stanford University

Research & Interests List

Natural Language Processing

Computational Linguistics

Deep Learning

Top articles of Christopher D Manning

pyvene: A library for understanding and improving PyTorch models via interventions

Interventions on model-internal states are fundamental operations in many areas of AI, including model editing, steering, robustness, and interpretability. To facilitate such research, we introduce , an open-source Python library that supports customizable interventions on a range of different PyTorch modules. supports complex intervention schemes with an intuitive configuration format, and its interventions can be static or include trainable parameters. We show how provides a unified and extensible framework for performing interventions on neural models and sharing the intervened upon models with others. We illustrate the power of the library via interpretability analyses using causal abstraction and knowledge localization. We publish our library through Python Package Index (PyPI) and provide code, documentation, and tutorials at https://github.com/stanfordnlp/pyvene.

Authors

Zhengxuan Wu,Atticus Geiger,Aryaman Arora,Jing Huang,Zheng Wang,Noah D Goodman,Christopher D Manning,Christopher Potts

Journal

arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07809

Published Date

2024/3/12

Do" English" Named Entity Recognizers Work Well on Global Englishes?

The vast majority of the popular English named entity recognition (NER) datasets contain American or British English data, despite the existence of many global varieties of English. As such, it is unclear whether they generalize for analyzing use of English globally. To test this, we build a newswire dataset, the Worldwide English NER Dataset, to analyze NER model performance on low-resource English variants from around the world. We test widely used NER toolkits and transformer models, including models using the pre-trained contextual models RoBERTa and ELECTRA, on three datasets: a commonly used British English newswire dataset, CoNLL 2003, a more American focused dataset OntoNotes, and our global dataset. All models trained on the CoNLL or OntoNotes datasets experienced significant performance drops-over 10 F1 in some cases-when tested on the Worldwide English dataset. Upon examination of region-specific errors, we observe the greatest performance drops for Oceania and Africa, while Asia and the Middle East had comparatively strong performance. Lastly, we find that a combined model trained on the Worldwide dataset and either CoNLL or OntoNotes lost only 1-2 F1 on both test sets.

Authors

Alexander Shan,John Bauer,Riley Carlson,Christopher Manning

Journal

arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.13465

Published Date

2024/4/20

Direct preference optimization: Your language model is secretly a reward model

While large-scale unsupervised language models (LMs) learn broad world knowledge and some reasoning skills, achieving precise control of their behavior is difficult due to the completely unsupervised nature of their training. Existing methods for gaining such steerability collect human labels of the relative quality of model generations and fine-tune the unsupervised LM to align with these preferences, often with reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). However, RLHF is a complex and often unstable procedure, first fitting a reward model that reflects the human preferences, and then fine-tuning the large unsupervised LM using reinforcement learning to maximize this estimated reward without drifting too far from the original model. In this paper, we leverage a mapping between reward functions and optimal policies to show that this constrained reward maximization problem can be optimized exactly with a single stage of policy training, essentially solving a classification problem on the human preference data. The resulting algorithm, which we call Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), is stable, performant, and computationally lightweight, eliminating the need for fitting a reward model, sampling from the LM during fine-tuning, or performing significant hyperparameter tuning. Our experiments show that DPO can fine-tune LMs to align with human preferences as well as or better than existing methods. Notably, fine-tuning with DPO exceeds RLHF's ability to control sentiment of generations and improves response quality in summarization and single-turn dialogue while being substantially simpler to implement and train.

Authors

Rafael Rafailov,Archit Sharma,Eric Mitchell,Christopher D Manning,Stefano Ermon,Chelsea Finn

Journal

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems

Published Date

2024/2/13

ReFT: Representation Finetuning for Language Models

Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) methods seek to adapt large models via updates to a small number of weights. However, much prior interpretability work has shown that representations encode rich semantic information, suggesting that editing representations might be a more powerful alternative. Here, we pursue this hypothesis by developing a family of $\textbf{Representation Finetuning (ReFT)}$ methods. ReFT methods operate on a frozen base model and learn task-specific interventions on hidden representations. We define a strong instance of the ReFT family, Low-rank Linear Subspace ReFT (LoReFT). LoReFT is a drop-in replacement for existing PEFTs and learns interventions that are 10x-50x more parameter-efficient than prior state-of-the-art PEFTs. We showcase LoReFT on eight commonsense reasoning tasks, four arithmetic reasoning tasks, Alpaca-Eval v1.0, and GLUE. In all these evaluations, LoReFT delivers the best balance of efficiency and performance, and almost always outperforms state-of-the-art PEFTs. We release a generic ReFT training library publicly at https://github.com/stanfordnlp/pyreft.

Authors

Zhengxuan Wu,Aryaman Arora,Zheng Wang,Atticus Geiger,Dan Jurafsky,Christopher D Manning,Christopher Potts

Journal

arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.03592

Published Date

2024/4/4

Model Editing with Canonical Examples

We introduce model editing with canonical examples, a setting in which (1) a single learning example is provided per desired behavior, (2) evaluation is performed exclusively out-of-distribution, and (3) deviation from an initial model is strictly limited. A canonical example is a simple instance of good behavior, e.g., The capital of Mauritius is Port Louis) or bad behavior, e.g., An aspect of researchers is coldhearted). The evaluation set contains more complex examples of each behavior (like a paragraph in which the capital of Mauritius is called for.) We create three datasets and modify three more for model editing with canonical examples, covering knowledge-intensive improvements, social bias mitigation, and syntactic edge cases. In our experiments on Pythia language models, we find that LoRA outperforms full finetuning and MEMIT. We then turn to the Backpack language model architecture because it is intended to enable targeted improvement. The Backpack defines a large bank of sense vectors--a decomposition of the different uses of each word--which are weighted and summed to form the output logits of the model. We propose sense finetuning, which selects and finetunes a few ( 10) sense vectors for each canonical example, and find that it outperforms other finetuning methods, e.g., 4.8% improvement vs 0.3%. Finally, we improve GPT-J-6B by an inference-time ensemble with just the changes from sense finetuning of a 35x smaller Backpack, in one setting outperforming editing GPT-J itself (4.1% vs 1.0%).

Authors

John Hewitt,Sarah Chen,Lanruo Lora Xie,Edward Adams,Percy Liang,Christopher D Manning

Journal

arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06155

Published Date

2024/2/9

FLawN-T5: An Empirical Examination of Effective Instruction-Tuning Data Mixtures for Legal Reasoning

Instruction tuning is an important step in making language models useful for direct user interaction. However, many legal tasks remain out of reach for most open LLMs and there do not yet exist any large scale instruction datasets for the domain. This critically limits research in this application area. In this work, we curate LawInstruct, a large legal instruction dataset, covering 17 jurisdictions, 24 languages and a total of 12M examples. We present evidence that domain-specific pretraining and instruction tuning improve performance on LegalBench, including improving Flan-T5 XL by 8 points or 16\% over the baseline. However, the effect does not generalize across all tasks, training regimes, model sizes, and other factors. LawInstruct is a resource for accelerating the development of models with stronger information processing and decision making capabilities in the legal domain.

Authors

Joel Niklaus,Lucia Zheng,Arya D McCarthy,Christopher Hahn,Brian M Rosen,Peter Henderson,Daniel E Ho,Garrett Honke,Percy Liang,Christopher Manning

Journal

arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02127

Published Date

2024/4/2

RAPTOR: Recursive Abstractive Processing for Tree-Organized Retrieval

Retrieval-augmented language models can better adapt to changes in world state and incorporate long-tail knowledge. However, most existing methods retrieve only short contiguous chunks from a retrieval corpus, limiting holistic understanding of the overall document context. We introduce the novel approach of recursively embedding, clustering, and summarizing chunks of text, constructing a tree with differing levels of summarization from the bottom up. At inference time, our RAPTOR model retrieves from this tree, integrating information across lengthy documents at different levels of abstraction. Controlled experiments show that retrieval with recursive summaries offers significant improvements over traditional retrieval-augmented LMs on several tasks. On question-answering tasks that involve complex, multi-step reasoning, we show state-of-the-art results; for example, by coupling RAPTOR retrieval with the use of GPT-4, we can improve the best performance on the QuALITY benchmark by 20% in absolute accuracy.

Authors

Parth Sarthi,Salman Abdullah,Aditi Tuli,Shubh Khanna,Anna Goldie,Christopher D Manning

Journal

arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.18059

Published Date

2024/1/31

Mapping the increasing use of llms in scientific papers

Scientific publishing lays the foundation of science by disseminating research findings, fostering collaboration, encouraging reproducibility, and ensuring that scientific knowledge is accessible, verifiable, and built upon over time. Recently, there has been immense speculation about how many people are using large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT in their academic writing, and to what extent this tool might have an effect on global scientific practices. However, we lack a precise measure of the proportion of academic writing substantially modified or produced by LLMs. To address this gap, we conduct the first systematic, large-scale analysis across 950,965 papers published between January 2020 and February 2024 on the arXiv, bioRxiv, and Nature portfolio journals, using a population-level statistical framework to measure the prevalence of LLM-modified content over time. Our statistical estimation operates on the corpus level and is more robust than inference on individual instances. Our findings reveal a steady increase in LLM usage, with the largest and fastest growth observed in Computer Science papers (up to 17.5%). In comparison, Mathematics papers and the Nature portfolio showed the least LLM modification (up to 6.3%). Moreover, at an aggregate level, our analysis reveals that higher levels of LLM-modification are associated with papers whose first authors post preprints more frequently, papers in more crowded research areas, and papers of shorter lengths. Our findings suggests that LLMs are being broadly used in scientific writings.

Authors

Weixin Liang,Yaohui Zhang,Zhengxuan Wu,Haley Lepp,Wenlong Ji,Xuandong Zhao,Hancheng Cao,Sheng Liu,Siyu He,Zhi Huang,Diyi Yang,Christopher Potts,Christopher D Manning,James Y Zou

Journal

arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.01268

Published Date

2024/4/1

Professor FAQs

What is Christopher D Manning's h-index at Stanford University?

The h-index of Christopher D Manning has been 109 since 2020 and 158 in total.

What are Christopher D Manning's research interests?

The research interests of Christopher D Manning are: Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, Deep Learning

What is Christopher D Manning's total number of citations?

Christopher D Manning has 236,817 citations in total.

What are the co-authors of Christopher D Manning?

The co-authors of Christopher D Manning are Andrew Ng, Dan Jurafsky, Hinrich Schütze, Danqi Chen, Kevin Clark.

Co-Authors

H-index: 144
Andrew Ng

Andrew Ng

Stanford University

H-index: 113
Dan Jurafsky

Dan Jurafsky

Stanford University

H-index: 79
Hinrich Schütze

Hinrich Schütze

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

H-index: 33
Danqi Chen

Danqi Chen

Princeton University

H-index: 16
Kevin Clark

Kevin Clark

Stanford University

academic-engine

Useful Links