The Fall of ROME: Understanding the Collapse of LLMs in Model Editing
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Examines the collapse of large language models (LLMs) during model editing, a critical challenge in the field of AI
- Introduces the concept of the "Fall of ROME" to describe the unexpected and dramatic failures that can occur when editing LLMs
- Explores potential causes of model collapse, including the "Butterfly Effect" and issues with tokenization, and proposes solutions to address these challenges
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores a critical problem in the world of AI: the unexpected and dramatic collapse of large language models (LLMs) during the process of model editing. The authors introduce the metaphor of the "Fall of ROME" to describe this phenomenon, where small changes to the model can lead to catastrophic failures.
The researchers investigate potential causes of this model collapse, including the Butterfly Effect – where even minor edits can have outsized and unpredictable consequences – as well as issues with tokenization that can undermine the model's fundamental structure. They also explore how scaling up model editing can gradually degrade a model's performance and efficiency.
To address these challenges, the paper proposes solutions like the "Rebuilding ROME" approach, which aims to maintain model integrity during sequential editing. The authors also introduce the "LLMEffiChecker" tool to help developers better understand and mitigate the efficiency degradation that can occur in LLMs.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a comprehensive investigation into the collapse of large language models (LLMs) during the model editing process, a critical challenge in the field of AI.
The researchers introduce the "Fall of ROME" metaphor to describe the unexpected and dramatic failures that can occur when editing LLMs, where small changes to the model can lead to catastrophic outcomes. They explore potential causes of this model collapse, including the Butterfly Effect – where minor edits can have outsized and unpredictable consequences – as well as issues with tokenization that can undermine the model's fundamental structure.
The paper also investigates how scaling up model editing can gradually degrade a model's performance and efficiency, leading to a gradual "Fall of ROME" over time.
To address these challenges, the researchers propose the "Rebuilding ROME" approach, which aims to maintain model integrity during sequential editing by preserving key aspects of the model's structure and functionality. They also introduce the "LLMEffiChecker" tool to help developers better understand and mitigate the efficiency degradation that can occur in LLMs.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a comprehensive and well-researched exploration of the challenges associated with model editing in the context of large language models (LLMs). The authors have done an excellent job of identifying and analyzing the key issues, such as the Butterfly Effect, tokenization problems, and the gradual degradation of model performance and efficiency.
One potential limitation of the research is that it focuses primarily on the technical aspects of model editing and collapse, without delving too deeply into the broader implications for the field of AI and society. While the proposed solutions, such as the Rebuilding ROME approach and the LLMEffiChecker tool, are valuable contributions, it would be interesting to see the authors explore the ethical and societal ramifications of these challenges and potential ways to mitigate them.
Additionally, the paper could benefit from a more critical assessment of the limitations and caveats of the research itself. For example, the authors could address the generalizability of their findings to different types of LLMs or examine the potential biases or assumptions inherent in their experimental design.
Overall, the paper is a significant contribution to the field of AI and serves as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners working on model editing and the robustness of large language models.
Conclusion
The paper's exploration of the "Fall of ROME" – the unexpected and dramatic collapse of large language models (LLMs) during the model editing process – is a critical investigation into a pressing challenge in the field of AI. The researchers have identified key factors, such as the Butterfly Effect, tokenization issues, and the gradual degradation of model performance, that can contribute to these catastrophic failures.
The proposed solutions, including the Rebuilding ROME approach and the LLMEffiChecker tool, offer promising avenues for addressing these challenges and maintaining the integrity of LLMs during the editing process. As the field of AI continues to advance, the insights and recommendations provided in this paper will be invaluable for researchers and practitioners working to develop robust and reliable large language models.
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
0
The Fall of ROME: Understanding the Collapse of LLMs in Model Editing
Wanli Yang, Fei Sun, Jiajun Tan, Xinyu Ma, Du Su, Dawei Yin, Huawei Shen
Despite significant progress in model editing methods, their application in real-world scenarios remains challenging as they often cause large language models (LLMs) to collapse. Among them, ROME is particularly concerning, as it could disrupt LLMs with only a single edit. In this paper, we study the root causes of such collapse. Through extensive analysis, we identify two primary factors that contribute to the collapse: i) inconsistent handling of prefixed and unprefixed keys in the parameter update equation may result in very small denominators, causing excessively large parameter updates; ii) the subject of collapse cases is usually the first token, whose unprefixed key distribution significantly differs from the prefixed key distribution in autoregressive transformers, causing the aforementioned issue to materialize. To validate our analysis, we propose a simple yet effective approach: uniformly using prefixed keys during editing phase and adding prefixes during the testing phase. The experimental results show that the proposed solution can prevent model collapse while maintaining the effectiveness of the edits.
Read more6/18/2024
📈
0
The Butterfly Effect of Model Editing: Few Edits Can Trigger Large Language Models Collapse
Wanli Yang, Fei Sun, Xinyu Ma, Xun Liu, Dawei Yin, Xueqi Cheng
Although model editing has shown promise in revising knowledge in Large Language Models (LLMs), its impact on the inherent capabilities of LLMs is often overlooked. In this work, we reveal a critical phenomenon: even a single edit can trigger model collapse, manifesting as significant performance degradation in various benchmark tasks. However, benchmarking LLMs after each edit, while necessary to prevent such collapses, is impractically time-consuming and resource-intensive. To mitigate this, we propose using perplexity as a surrogate metric, validated by extensive experiments demonstrating changes in an edited model's perplexity are strongly correlated with its downstream task performances. We further conduct an in-depth study on sequential editing, a practical setting for real-world scenarios, across various editing methods and LLMs, focusing on hard cases from our previous single edit studies. The results indicate that nearly all examined editing methods result in model collapse after only few edits. To facilitate further research, we have utilized GPT-3.5 to develop a new dataset, HardEdit, based on those hard cases. This dataset aims to establish the foundation for pioneering research in reliable model editing and the mechanisms underlying editing-induced model collapse. We hope this work can draw the community's attention to the potential risks inherent in model editing practices.
Read more6/6/2024
0
Rebuilding ROME : Resolving Model Collapse during Sequential Model Editing
Akshat Gupta, Sidharth Baskaran, Gopala Anumanchipalli
Recent work using Rank-One Model Editing (ROME), a popular model editing method, has shown that there are certain facts that the algorithm is unable to edit without breaking the model. Such edits have previously been called disabling edits. These disabling edits cause immediate model collapse and limits the use of ROME for sequential editing. In this paper, we show that disabling edits are an artifact of irregularities in the implementation of ROME. With this paper, we provide a more stable implementation ROME, which we call r-ROME and show that model collapse is no longer observed when making large scale sequential edits with r-ROME, while further improving generalization and locality of model editing compared to the original implementation of ROME. We also provide a detailed mathematical explanation of the reason behind disabling edits.
Read more4/17/2024
0
Model Editing at Scale leads to Gradual and Catastrophic Forgetting
Akshat Gupta, Anurag Rao, Gopala Anumanchipalli
Editing knowledge in large language models is an attractive capability to have which allows us to correct incorrectly learnt facts during pre-training, as well as update the model with an ever-growing list of new facts. While existing model editing techniques have shown promise, they are usually evaluated using metrics for reliability, specificity and generalization over one or few edits. We argue that for model editing to have practical utility, we must be able to make multiple edits to the same model. With this in mind, we evaluate the current model editing methods at scale, focusing on two state of the art methods: ROME and MEMIT. We find that as the model is edited sequentially with multiple facts, it continually forgets previously edited facts and the ability to perform downstream tasks. This forgetting happens in two phases -- an initial gradual but progressive forgetting phase followed by abrupt or catastrophic forgetting phase. Both gradual and catastrophic forgetting limit the usefulness of model editing methods at scale -- the former making model editing less effective as multiple edits are made to the model while the latter caps the scalability of such model editing methods. Our analysis also highlights other key limitations of ROME and MEMIT at scale. With our work, we push for the development and evaluation of model editing methods keeping scalability in mind.
Read more6/11/2024