Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly replacing help forums like StackOverflow, and are especially helpful for non-professional programmers and end users. These users are often interested in data-centric tasks, such as spreadsheet manipulation and data wrangling, which are hard to solve if the intent is only communicated using a natural-language description, without including the data. But how do we decide how much data and which data to include in the prompt? This paper makes two contributions towards answering this question. First, we create a dataset of real-world NL-to-code tasks manipulating tabular data, mined from StackOverflow posts. Second, we introduce a cluster-then-select prompting technique, which adds the most representative rows from the input data to the LLM prompt. Our experiments show that LLM performance is indeed sensitive to the amount of data passed in the prompt, and that for tasks with a lot of syntactic variation in the input table, our cluster-then-select technique outperforms a random selection baseline.
Users are increasingly being warned to check AI-generated content for correctness. Still, as LLMs (and other generative models) generate more complex output, such as summaries, tables, or code, it becomes harder for the user to audit or evaluate the output for quality or correctness. Hence, we are seeing the emergence of tool-assisted experiences to help the user double-check a piece of AI-generated content. We refer to these as co-audit tools. Co-audit tools complement prompt engineering techniques: one helps the user construct the input prompt, while the other helps them check the output response. As a specific example, this paper describes recent research on co-audit tools for spreadsheet computations powered by generative models. We explain why co-audit experiences are essential for any application of generative AI where quality is important and errors are consequential (as is common in spreadsheet computations). We propose a preliminary list of principles for co-audit, and outline research challenges.
Row completion is the task of augmenting a given table of text and numbers with additional, relevant rows. The task divides into two steps: subject suggestion, the task of populating the main column; and gap filling, the task of populating the remaining columns. We present state-of-the-art results for subject suggestion and gap filling measured on a standard benchmark (WikiTables). Our idea is to solve this task by harmoniously combining knowledge base table interpretation and free text generation. We interpret the table using the knowledge base to suggest new rows and generate metadata like headers through property linking. To improve candidate diversity, we synthesize additional rows using free text generation via GPT-3, and crucially, we exploit the metadata we interpret to produce better prompts for text generation. Finally, we verify that the additional synthesized content can be linked to the knowledge base or a trusted web source such as Wikipedia.