While generative AI enables high-fidelity UI generation from text prompts, users struggle to articulate design intent and evaluate or refine results—creating gulfs of execution and evaluation. To understand the information needed for UI generation, we conducted a thematic analysis of UI prompting guidelines, identifying key design semantics and discovering that they are hierarchical and interdependent. Leveraging these findings, we developed a system that enables users to specify semantics, visualize relationships, and extract how semantics are reflected in generated UIs. By making semantics serve as an intermediate representation between human intent and AI output, our system bridges both gulfs by making requirements explicit and outcomes interpretable. A comparative user study suggests that our approach enhances users’ perceived control over intent expression and outcome interpretation, and facilitates more predictable iterative refinement. Our work demonstrates how explicit semantic representation enables systematic and explainable exploration of design possibilities in AI-driven UI design.

Online and offline $\mathtt{RLHF}$ methods, such as $\mathtt{PPO}$ and $\mathtt{DPO}$, have been highly successful in aligning AI with human preferences. Despite their success, however, these methods suffer from fundamental limitations: $\mathbf{(a)}$ Models trained with $\mathtt{RLHF}$ can learn from mistakes or negative examples through RL mechanism or contrastive loss during training. However, at inference time, they lack an innate self-improvement mechanism for error corrections. $\mathbf{(b)}$ The optimal solution of existing methods is highly task-dependent, making it difficult for them to generalize to new tasks. To address these challenges, we propose Self-Improving Robust Preference Optimization ($\mathtt{SRPO}$), a practical and mathematically principled offline $\mathtt{RLHF}$ framework. The key idea behind $\mathtt{SRPO}$ is to cast the problem of learning from human preferences as a self-improvement process, mathematically formulated as a min-max objective that jointly optimizes a self-improvement policy and a generative policy in an adversarial fashion. Crucially, the solution for this optimization problem is independent of the training task, which makes it robust to its changes. We then show that this objective can be reformulated as a non-adversarial offline loss, which can be efficiently optimized using standard supervised learning techniques at scale. To demonstrate $\mathtt{SRPO}$’s effectiveness, we evaluate it using AI Win-Rate (WR) against human (GOLD) completions. When tested on the XSum dataset, $\mathtt{SRPO}$ outperforms $\mathtt{DPO}$ by a margin of $\mathbf{15}$% after $5$ self-revisions, achieving an impressive $\mathbf{90}$% WR. Moreover, on the challenging Arena-Hard prompts, $\mathtt{SRPO}$ outperforms both $\mathtt{DPO}$ and $\mathtt{IPO}$ (by $\mathbf{4}$% without revision and $\mathbf{6}$% after a single revision), reaching a $\mathbf{56}$% WR against against $\mathtt{Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct}$.

Current Vision Language Models (VLMs) remain vulnerable to malicious prompts that induce harmful outputs. Existing safety benchmarks for VLMs primarily rely on automated evaluation methods, but these methods struggle to detect implicit harmful content or produce inaccurate evaluations. Therefore, we found that existing benchmarks have low levels of harmfulness, ambiguous data, and limited diversity in image-text pair combinations. To address these issues, we propose the ELITE benchmark, a high-quality safety evaluation benchmark for VLMs, underpinned by our enhanced evaluation method, the ELITE evaluator. The ELITE evaluator explicitly incorporates a toxicity score to accurately assess harmfulness in multimodal contexts, where VLMs often provide specific, convincing, but unharmful descriptions of images. We filter out ambiguous and low-quality image-text pairs from existing benchmarks using the ELITE evaluator and generate diverse combinations of safe and unsafe image-text pairs. Our experiments demonstrate that the ELITE evaluator achieves superior alignment with human evaluations compared to prior automated methods, and the ELITE benchmark offers enhanced benchmark quality and diversity. By introducing ELITE, we pave the way for safer, more robust VLMs, contributing essential tools for evaluating and mitigating safety risks in real-world applications.

Yannis Flet-Berliac, Nathan Grinsztajn, Florian Strub, Eugene Choi, Bill Wu, Chris Cremer, Arash Ahmadian, Yash Chandak, Mohammad Gheshlaghi Azar, Olivier Pietquin, Matthieu Geist. Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 2024.