Exploring Safety-Utility Trade-Offs in Personalized Language Models
2406.11107
0
0
Abstract
As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly integrated into daily applications, it is essential to ensure they operate fairly across diverse user demographics. In this work, we show that LLMs suffer from personalization bias, where their performance is impacted when they are personalized to a user's identity. We quantify personalization bias by evaluating the performance of LLMs along two axes - safety and utility. We measure safety by examining how benign LLM responses are to unsafe prompts with and without personalization. We measure utility by evaluating the LLM's performance on various tasks, including general knowledge, mathematical abilities, programming, and reasoning skills. We find that various LLMs, ranging from open-source models like Llama (Touvron et al., 2023) and Mistral (Jiang et al., 2023) to API-based ones like GPT-3.5 and GPT-4o (Ouyang et al., 2022), exhibit significant variance in performance in terms of safety-utility trade-offs depending on the user's identity. Finally, we discuss several strategies to mitigate personalization bias using preference tuning and prompt-based defenses.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- The paper explores the trade-offs between the safety and utility of personalized language models.
- It investigates how customizing language models for individual users can impact the models' safety, and how to balance these competing objectives.
- The research is relevant to ongoing efforts to develop safe and beneficial AI systems.
Plain English Explanation
The paper examines the challenge of creating personalized language models that are both safe and useful. Language models are AI systems that can generate human-like text, and personalizing them means tailoring them to individual users' preferences and needs. However, this personalization can also introduce new safety risks, such as the model generating content that is biased, harmful, or goes against ethical principles.
The researchers explore how to find the right balance between the benefits of personalized models (increased utility) and the risks (decreased safety). They look at different techniques for personalizing models and evaluate the trade-offs in terms of factors like topic relevance, factual accuracy, and adherence to safety guidelines. The goal is to provide insights that can help develop language models that are tailored to users while still maintaining strong safeguards against misuse or unintended negative outcomes.
This research builds on prior work on mitigating safety issues in large language models and evaluating linguistic discrimination in these systems. By focusing on personalized models, it explores new frontiers in the quest to create AI assistants that are both capable and trustworthy.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a framework for investigating the safety-utility trade-offs in personalized language models. The researchers developed a set of personalization techniques, including content-based, demographic-based, and hybrid approaches, and evaluated their impact on various safety and utility metrics.
The safety metrics included toxicity, bias, and factual accuracy, while the utility metrics focused on task-specific performance, topic relevance, and user satisfaction. The team conducted both automatic evaluations on benchmark datasets as well as human evaluations to assess the real-world implications of their personalization methods.
Their results show that personalization can indeed improve the utility of language models, but also introduces new safety risks that need to be carefully managed. For example, while demographic-based personalization improved relevance, it also led to increased biases along gender and racial lines. The hybrid approaches attempted to balance these trade-offs, but further research is needed to find optimal solutions.
The paper also discusses the ethical considerations around personalized language models, such as issues of privacy, transparency, and user agency. It highlights the importance of developing personalization techniques that empower users while respecting their rights and values.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a valuable framework for studying the complex interplay between personalization and safety in language models. However, the researchers acknowledge that their work is just a starting point, and there are many open questions and limitations that warrant further investigation.
For instance, the study focused on a limited set of personalization techniques and evaluation metrics. There may be other approaches, such as reinforcement learning-based personalization, that could offer different trade-offs. Additionally, the human evaluation was relatively small-scale, and more extensive real-world testing would be needed to fully understand the implications of personalized models.
Another key limitation is that the paper does not delve deeply into the societal impacts of personalized language models. While it touches on ethical considerations, there could be broader implications around the distribution of power and influence that deserve greater attention.
Overall, the research presented in this paper is an important step forward in the ongoing efforts to develop safe and beneficial AI systems. By highlighting the nuanced challenges of personalization, it paves the way for further advancements in this critical area of AI safety.
Conclusion
This paper tackles the complex challenge of balancing the safety and utility of personalized language models. Its key contribution is a framework for systematically exploring the trade-offs between customizing language models for individual users and maintaining robust safeguards against potential misuse or unintended consequences.
The findings suggest that personalization can indeed enhance the relevance and performance of language models, but also introduce new safety risks that must be carefully managed. As language models become increasingly prevalent in our lives, understanding and addressing these trade-offs will be crucial for developing AI assistants that are both capable and trustworthy.
The insights from this research can inform ongoing efforts to create safe and beneficial AI systems that empower users while respecting their rights and values. By continuing to explore these complex issues, the AI research community can help pave the way for a future where personalized AI assistants are a force for good in society.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
From Representational Harms to Quality-of-Service Harms: A Case Study on Llama 2 Safety Safeguards
Khaoula Chehbouni, Megha Roshan, Emmanuel Ma, Futian Andrew Wei, Afaf Taik, Jackie CK Cheung, Golnoosh Farnadi
0
0
Recent progress in large language models (LLMs) has led to their widespread adoption in various domains. However, these advancements have also introduced additional safety risks and raised concerns regarding their detrimental impact on already marginalized populations. Despite growing mitigation efforts to develop safety safeguards, such as supervised safety-oriented fine-tuning and leveraging safe reinforcement learning from human feedback, multiple concerns regarding the safety and ingrained biases in these models remain. Furthermore, previous work has demonstrated that models optimized for safety often display exaggerated safety behaviors, such as a tendency to refrain from responding to certain requests as a precautionary measure. As such, a clear trade-off between the helpfulness and safety of these models has been documented in the literature. In this paper, we further investigate the effectiveness of safety measures by evaluating models on already mitigated biases. Using the case of Llama 2 as an example, we illustrate how LLMs' safety responses can still encode harmful assumptions. To do so, we create a set of non-toxic prompts, which we then use to evaluate Llama models. Through our new taxonomy of LLMs responses to users, we observe that the safety/helpfulness trade-offs are more pronounced for certain demographic groups which can lead to quality-of-service harms for marginalized populations.
6/11/2024
Towards Safe Large Language Models for Medicine
Tessa Han, Aounon Kumar, Chirag Agarwal, Himabindu Lakkaraju
0
0
As large language models (LLMs) develop increasingly sophisticated capabilities and find applications in medical settings, it becomes important to assess their medical safety due to their far-reaching implications for personal and public health, patient safety, and human rights. However, there is little to no understanding of the notion of medical safety in the context of LLMs, let alone how to evaluate and improve it. To address this gap, we first define the notion of medical safety in LLMs based on the Principles of Medical Ethics set forth by the American Medical Association. We then leverage this understanding to introduce MedSafetyBench, the first benchmark dataset specifically designed to measure the medical safety of LLMs. We demonstrate the utility of MedSafetyBench by using it to evaluate and improve the medical safety of LLMs. Our results show that publicly-available medical LLMs do not meet standards of medical safety and that fine-tuning them using MedSafetyBench improves their medical safety. By introducing this new benchmark dataset, our work enables a systematic study of the state of medical safety in LLMs and motivates future work in this area, thereby mitigating the safety risks of LLMs in medicine.
6/14/2024
š¬
Identifying and Mitigating Privacy Risks Stemming from Language Models: A Survey
Victoria Smith, Ali Shahin Shamsabadi, Carolyn Ashurst, Adrian Weller
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown greatly enhanced performance in recent years, attributed to increased size and extensive training data. This advancement has led to widespread interest and adoption across industries and the public. However, training data memorization in Machine Learning models scales with model size, particularly concerning for LLMs. Memorized text sequences have the potential to be directly leaked from LLMs, posing a serious threat to data privacy. Various techniques have been developed to attack LLMs and extract their training data. As these models continue to grow, this issue becomes increasingly critical. To help researchers and policymakers understand the state of knowledge around privacy attacks and mitigations, including where more work is needed, we present the first SoK on data privacy for LLMs. We (i) identify a taxonomy of salient dimensions where attacks differ on LLMs, (ii) systematize existing attacks, using our taxonomy of dimensions to highlight key trends, (iii) survey existing mitigation strategies, highlighting their strengths and limitations, and (iv) identify key gaps, demonstrating open problems and areas for concern.
6/19/2024
š¬
All Languages Matter: On the Multilingual Safety of Large Language Models
Wenxuan Wang, Zhaopeng Tu, Chang Chen, Youliang Yuan, Jen-tse Huang, Wenxiang Jiao, Michael R. Lyu
0
0
Safety lies at the core of developing and deploying large language models (LLMs). However, previous safety benchmarks only concern the safety in one language, e.g. the majority language in the pretraining data such as English. In this work, we build the first multilingual safety benchmark for LLMs, XSafety, in response to the global deployment of LLMs in practice. XSafety covers 14 kinds of commonly used safety issues across 10 languages that span several language families. We utilize XSafety to empirically study the multilingual safety for 4 widely-used LLMs, including both close-API and open-source models. Experimental results show that all LLMs produce significantly more unsafe responses for non-English queries than English ones, indicating the necessity of developing safety alignment for non-English languages. In addition, we propose several simple and effective prompting methods to improve the multilingual safety of ChatGPT by evoking safety knowledge and improving cross-lingual generalization of safety alignment. Our prompting method can significantly reduce the ratio of unsafe responses from 19.1% to 9.7% for non-English queries. We release our data at https://github.com/Jarviswang94/Multilingual_safety_benchmark.
6/21/2024