Journal Article10.48550/arXiv.2209.14375
Improving alignment of dialogue agents via targeted human judgements
A. Glaese,Nathan McAleese,Maja Trkebacz,John Aslanides,Vlad Firoiu,Timo Ewalds,Maribeth Rauh,Laura Weidinger,Martin Chadwick,Phoebe Thacker,Lucy Campbell-Gillingham,Jonathan Uesato,Po-Sen Huang,Ramona Comanescu,Fan Yang,Abigail See,Sumanth Dathathri,Rory Greig,Charlie Chen,Doug Fritz,Jaume Sanchez Elias,Richard Green,Sona Mokra,Nicholas Fernando,Boxi Wu,Rachel Foley,Susannah Young,Iason Gabriel,William S. Isaac,John F. J. Mellor,Demis Hassabis,Koray Kavukcuoglu,Lisa Anne Hendricks,Geoffrey Irving +33 more
349
TL;DR: This research presents a state-of-the-art knowledge graph depicting the architecture of the connective tissue of the autonomic nervous system and some of the mechanisms responsible for seizure and depression are described.
read more
Abstract: We present Sparrow, an information-seeking dialogue agent trained to be more helpful, correct, and harmless compared to prompted language model baselines. We use reinforcement learning from human feedback to train our models with two new additions to help human raters judge agent behaviour. First, to make our agent more helpful and harmless, we break down the requirements for good dialogue into natural language rules the agent should follow, and ask raters about each rule separately. We demonstrate that this breakdown enables us to collect more targeted human judgements of agent behaviour and allows for more efficient rule-conditional reward models. Second, our agent provides evidence from sources supporting factual claims when collecting preference judgements over model statements. For factual questions, evidence provided by Sparrow supports the sampled response 78% of the time. Sparrow is preferred more often than baselines while being more resilient to adversarial probing by humans, violating our rules only 8% of the time when probed. Finally, we conduct extensive analyses showing that though our model learns to follow our rules it can exhibit distributional biases.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
The Consensus Game: Language Model Generation via Equilibrium Search
Athul Paul Jacob,Yikang Shen,Gabriele Farina,Jacob Andreas +3 more
TL;DR: This work introduces a new, a training-free, game-theoretic procedure for language model decoding that improves performance over existing LM decoding procedures and develops computational procedures for finding approximate equilibria of this game, resulting in a decoding algorithm the authors call EQUILIBRIUM-RANKING.
Learning Optimal Advantage from Preferences and Mistaking it for Reward
W. Bradley Knox,Stephane Hatgis-Kessell,Sigurdur Orn Adalgeirsson,Serena Booth,Anca D. Dragan,Peter Stone,Scott Niekum +6 more
TL;DR: Insight is provided regarding why learning under the partial return preference model tends to work so well in practice, despite it conforming poorly to how humans give preferences.
Make Them Spill the Beans! Coercive Knowledge Extraction from (Production) LLMs
Zhuo Zhang,Guangyu Shen,Guanhong Tao,Siyuan Cheng,Xiangyu Zhang +4 more
TL;DR: The findings indicate that interrogation can extract toxic knowledge even from models specifically designed for coding tasks, and can complement jail-breaking strategies, with which results in further boosting attack performance.
8
Towards Agile Text Classifiers for Everyone
Maximilian Mozes,Jessica D. Hoffmann,Katrin Tomanek,Muhamed Kouate,Nithum Thain,Ann Yuan,Tolga Bolukbasi,Lucas Dixon +7 more
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors introduce and evaluate methods for agile text classification, whereby classifiers are trained using small, targeted datasets that can be quickly developed for a particular safety policy.
Iterative Data Smoothing: Mitigating Reward Overfitting and Overoptimization in RLHF
Bang-Fen Zhu,Michael I. Jordan,Jiantao Jiao +2 more
TL;DR: The core idea is that during each training epoch, the model is updated with the data, but also update the date using the model, replacing hard labels with soft labels, and the empirical findings highlight the superior performance of this approach over the traditional methods.
8
References
•Proceedings Article
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Diederik P. Kingma,Jimmy Ba +1 more
- 01 Jan 2015
TL;DR: This work introduces Adam, an algorithm for first-order gradient-based optimization of stochastic objective functions, based on adaptive estimates of lower-order moments, and provides a regret bound on the convergence rate that is comparable to the best known results under the online convex optimization framework.
138.5K
•Book
Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction
Richard S. Sutton,Andrew G. Barto +1 more
- 01 Jan 1988
TL;DR: This book provides a clear and simple account of the key ideas and algorithms of reinforcement learning, which ranges from the history of the field's intellectual foundations to the most recent developments and applications.
•Proceedings Article
Asynchronous methods for deep reinforcement learning
Volodymyr Mnih,Adrià Puigdomènech Badia,Mehdi Mirza,Alex Graves,Tim Harley,Timothy P. Lillicrap,David Silver,Koray Kavukcuoglu +7 more
- 19 Jun 2016
TL;DR: A conceptually simple and lightweight framework for deep reinforcement learning that uses asynchronous gradient descent for optimization of deep neural network controllers and shows that asynchronous actor-critic succeeds on a wide variety of continuous motor control problems as well as on a new task of navigating random 3D mazes using a visual input.
Logic and Conversation
Siobhan Chapman
- 01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: For instance, Grice was interested in Quine's logical approach to language, although he differed from Quine over certain specific specific questions, such as the viability of the distinction between analytic and synthetic statements.
8.9K
The case for motivated reasoning.
TL;DR: It is proposed that motivation may affect reasoning through reliance on a biased set of cognitive processes--that is, strategies for accessing, constructing, and evaluating beliefs--that are considered most likely to yield the desired conclusion.