- Removed empty lines from README.md files in CWT_Markdown, EEG_Analy…

…sis, and EEG_MachineLearning directories to streamline content presentation.

External_URLs/Supporting_Literature/Markdown/Ai_Markdown/Ai_Architecture/Ai-A3.md

@@ -1,29 +1,30 @@
 # Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves
 
 Citation Information
-	•	Author(s): Yihe Deng, Weitong Zhang, Zixiang Chen, Quanquan Gu
-	•	Title: Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves
-	•	Journal/Source: Preprint on arXiv
-	•	Publication Year: 2024
-	•	DOI/URL: arXiv:2311.04205v2
-	•	Affiliation: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles
+ • Author(s): Yihe Deng, Weitong Zhang, Zixiang Chen, Quanquan Gu
+ • Title: Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves
+ • Journal/Source: Preprint on arXiv
+ • Publication Year: 2024
+ • DOI/URL: arXiv:2311.04205v2
+ • Affiliation: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles
 
 Audience
-	•	Target Audience: AI researchers, machine learning practitioners, and users of large language models (LLMs) interested in prompt engineering and improving the effectiveness of AI systems.
-	•	Application: Enhancing LLM performance in various reasoning and comprehension tasks through systematic rephrasing of prompts to reduce ambiguity.
-	•	Outcome: Improved accuracy and utility of LLMs in diverse applications, such as automated question answering, symbolic reasoning, and commonsense inference.
+ • Target Audience: AI researchers, machine learning practitioners, and users of large language models (LLMs) interested in prompt engineering and improving the effectiveness of AI systems.
+ • Application: Enhancing LLM performance in various reasoning and comprehension tasks through systematic rephrasing of prompts to reduce ambiguity.
+ • Outcome: Improved accuracy and utility of LLMs in diverse applications, such as automated question answering, symbolic reasoning, and commonsense inference.
 
 Relevance
-	•	Significance: Identifies and addresses a key limitation of LLMs—their sensitivity to ambiguous or suboptimal prompts. This issue affects the quality of their outputs and their adoption in practical scenarios.
-	•	Real-world Implications: Facilitates the design of better AI-assisted systems for education, healthcare, customer service, and beyond, where precise and reliable responses are crucial.
+ • Significance: Identifies and addresses a key limitation of LLMs—their sensitivity to ambiguous or suboptimal prompts. This issue affects the quality of their outputs and their adoption in practical scenarios.
+ • Real-world Implications: Facilitates the design of better AI-assisted systems for education, healthcare, customer service, and beyond, where precise and reliable responses are crucial.
 
 Conclusions
-	•	Takeaways:
-	1.	The proposed “Rephrase and Respond” (RaR) method improves LLM performance by having the model rephrase ambiguous questions before providing an answer.
-	2.	RaR significantly outperforms baseline approaches across diverse tasks and is complementary to methods like Chain-of-Thought (CoT).
-	3.	Stronger LLMs (e.g., GPT-4) generate better rephrased questions that benefit weaker LLMs when used in a two-step RaR framework.
-	•	Practical Implications: The RaR technique can be implemented as a lightweight, unsupervised enhancement for AI systems to improve task accuracy without additional training data.
-	•	Potential Impact: Establishes a scalable way to align human intentions with LLM interpretations, enabling clearer and more effective communication with AI systems.
+ • Takeaways:
+
+ 1. The proposed “Rephrase and Respond” (RaR) method improves LLM performance by having the model rephrase ambiguous questions before providing an answer.
+ 2. RaR significantly outperforms baseline approaches across diverse tasks and is complementary to methods like Chain-of-Thought (CoT).
+ 3. Stronger LLMs (e.g., GPT-4) generate better rephrased questions that benefit weaker LLMs when used in a two-step RaR framework.
+ • Practical Implications: The RaR technique can be implemented as a lightweight, unsupervised enhancement for AI systems to improve task accuracy without additional training data.
+ • Potential Impact: Establishes a scalable way to align human intentions with LLM interpretations, enabling clearer and more effective communication with AI systems.
 
 Contextual Insight
 
@@ -32,11 +33,11 @@ Abstract in a Nutshell
 This paper introduces “Rephrase and Respond” (RaR), a method for improving LLM responses by systematically rephrasing input questions to enhance clarity and reduce ambiguity. The method demonstrates robust improvements in task performance across multiple benchmarks and offers a cost-effective, training-free approach for enhancing LLM capabilities.
 
 Abstract Keywords
-	•	Prompt Engineering
-	•	Large Language Models (LLMs)
-	•	Rephrasing
-	•	Chain-of-Thought
-	•	Zero-shot Learning
+ • Prompt Engineering
+ • Large Language Models (LLMs)
+ • Rephrasing
+ • Chain-of-Thought
+ • Zero-shot Learning
 
 Gap/Need
 
@@ -47,51 +48,54 @@ Innovation
 Combines rephrasing and answering within a single framework to simplify deployment while significantly enhancing model response quality.
 
 Key Quotes
-	1.	“RaR demonstrates that rephrasing can resolve ambiguities imperceptible to humans, allowing LLMs to align better with human intentions.”
-	2.	“The two-step RaR method shows that stronger LLMs can assist weaker models in achieving higher performance by refining prompts.”
-	3.	“RaR offers a plug-and-play, unsupervised solution that is both economical and widely applicable to diverse tasks.”
+
+ 1. “RaR demonstrates that rephrasing can resolve ambiguities imperceptible to humans, allowing LLMs to align better with human intentions.”
+ 2. “The two-step RaR method shows that stronger LLMs can assist weaker models in achieving higher performance by refining prompts.”
+ 3. “RaR offers a plug-and-play, unsupervised solution that is both economical and widely applicable to diverse tasks.”
 
 Questions and Answers
-	1.	What is RaR?
-	•	A method where LLMs rephrase questions before answering to improve clarity and response accuracy.
-	2.	How does RaR compare to Chain-of-Thought (CoT)?
-	•	RaR complements CoT and can be combined with it for additional performance gains.
-	3.	What types of tasks benefit most from RaR?
-	•	Commonsense reasoning, symbolic reasoning, and tasks requiring detailed disambiguation.
+
+ 1. What is RaR?
+ • A method where LLMs rephrase questions before answering to improve clarity and response accuracy.
+ 2. How does RaR compare to Chain-of-Thought (CoT)?
+ • RaR complements CoT and can be combined with it for additional performance gains.
+ 3. What types of tasks benefit most from RaR?
+ • Commonsense reasoning, symbolic reasoning, and tasks requiring detailed disambiguation.
 
 Paper Details
 
 Purpose/Objective
-	•	Goal: Enhance LLM performance by addressing prompt ambiguities through systematic rephrasing.
-	•	Research Questions:
-	1.	How can prompt rephrasing improve LLM performance?
-	2.	What tasks are most affected by ambiguous prompts?
-	3.	Can rephrased prompts from stronger models benefit weaker models?
+ • Goal: Enhance LLM performance by addressing prompt ambiguities through systematic rephrasing.
+ • Research Questions:
+
+ 1. How can prompt rephrasing improve LLM performance?
+ 2. What tasks are most affected by ambiguous prompts?
+ 3. Can rephrased prompts from stronger models benefit weaker models?
 
 Methodology
-	•	System Design: RaR involves rephrasing ambiguous prompts before answering. In a two-step variation, stronger models rephrase the prompt for weaker ones.
-	•	Tasks Evaluated:
-	•	Knowledge classification and comparison
-	•	Commonsense QA (CSQA)
-	•	Symbolic reasoning tasks
-	•	Bias and fairness evaluations
-	•	Metrics: Task accuracy before and after applying RaR, as well as comparative evaluations with CoT.
+ • System Design: RaR involves rephrasing ambiguous prompts before answering. In a two-step variation, stronger models rephrase the prompt for weaker ones.
+ • Tasks Evaluated:
+ • Knowledge classification and comparison
+ • Commonsense QA (CSQA)
+ • Symbolic reasoning tasks
+ • Bias and fairness evaluations
+ • Metrics: Task accuracy before and after applying RaR, as well as comparative evaluations with CoT.
 
 Main Results/Findings
-	•	Metrics:
-	•	RaR improved accuracy by an average of 24.82% across 10 tasks.
-	•	Combining RaR with CoT further enhanced results.
-	•	Two-step RaR: Weaker LLMs achieved substantial performance gains when using rephrased prompts from stronger models.
+ • Metrics:
+ • RaR improved accuracy by an average of 24.82% across 10 tasks.
+ • Combining RaR with CoT further enhanced results.
+ • Two-step RaR: Weaker LLMs achieved substantial performance gains when using rephrased prompts from stronger models.
 
 Limitations
-	•	Evaluation is limited to specific tasks and does not address real-world application variability.
-	•	Results rely on benchmarks; generalizability to unstructured scenarios is uncertain.
+ • Evaluation is limited to specific tasks and does not address real-world application variability.
+ • Results rely on benchmarks; generalizability to unstructured scenarios is uncertain.
 
 Proposed Future Work
-	•	Extend RaR evaluations to more complex and open-ended tasks.
-	•	Investigate human-LLM collaboration in generating rephrased prompts.
+ • Extend RaR evaluations to more complex and open-ended tasks.
+ • Investigate human-LLM collaboration in generating rephrased prompts.
 
 AutoExpert Insights and Commentary
-	•	Critiques: While effective, the reliance on stronger LLMs for two-step RaR might limit scalability in resource-constrained environments. More research is needed to quantify the impact of RaR in dynamic, real-world settings.
-	•	Praise: The method is simple, elegant, and demonstrates strong empirical results, making it a practical tool for improving AI-human interaction.
-	•	Questions: Could this method address cultural and linguistic biases in LLMs? How might iterative rephrasing affect response efficiency in time-sensitive applications?
+ • Critiques: While effective, the reliance on stronger LLMs for two-step RaR might limit scalability in resource-constrained environments. More research is needed to quantify the impact of RaR in dynamic, real-world settings.
+ • Praise: The method is simple, elegant, and demonstrates strong empirical results, making it a practical tool for improving AI-human interaction.
+ • Questions: Could this method address cultural and linguistic biases in LLMs? How might iterative rephrasing affect response efficiency in time-sensitive applications?

external_urls/supporting_literature/markdown/cwt_markdown/README.md

@@ -1,2 +1 @@
 # CWT\_Markdown
-

external_urls/supporting_literature/markdown/eeg_analysis/README.md

@@ -1,2 +1 @@
 # EEG\_Analysis
-

external_urls/supporting_literature/markdown/eeg_analysis/eeg_machinelearning/README.md

@@ -1,2 +1 @@
 # EEG\_MachineLearning
-