Refusing Safe Prompts for Multi-modal Large Language Models
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- A research paper that explores ways to improve the safety of large language models (LLMs)
- Focuses on enabling LLMs to refuse requests that could be unsafe or harmful
- Proposes and evaluates several approaches to improve LLM safety, including [object Object], [object Object], [object Object], [object Object], and [object Object]
Plain English Explanation
Large language models (LLMs) are powerful AI systems that can generate human-like text. However, there are concerns about their safety and the potential for them to be misused to create harmful or misleading content. This research paper explores ways to make LLMs more safe and responsible.
The key idea is to enable LLMs to "refuse" requests that could be unsafe or harmful. For example, if a user asks an LLM to generate text promoting hate speech or violence, the model should be able to recognize that the request is unsafe and refuse to comply. The paper proposes and evaluates several different approaches to implementing this "refusal" capability in LLMs.
One approach is called [object Object], which trains the LLM to identify potentially unsafe requests and refuse to generate that content. Another approach, [object Object], uses a separate "refusal" model that works alongside the main LLM to assess the safety of requests.
The paper also explores techniques like [object Object], which uses prompts to guide the LLM towards safer outputs, and [object Object], which aims to protect the LLM's safety without degrading its overall performance.
The researchers also examine potential issues and limitations, such as the challenge of [object Object] and ensuring the LLM's safety measures don't overly restrict its capabilities.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents several approaches to improving the safety of large language models (LLMs) by enabling them to refuse potentially unsafe requests:
-
Refuse Whenever You Feel Unsafe: This method trains the LLM to directly identify and refuse unsafe requests. The model is fine-tuned on a dataset of safe and unsafe prompts, learning to recognize and reject prompts that could lead to harmful outputs.
-
Refusal Language Models Is Mediated by Single: In this approach, a separate "refusal" model works alongside the main LLM. The refusal model evaluates the safety of a given request, and the main LLM only generates output if the refusal model deems the request safe.
-
Prompt-Driven Safeguarding Large Language Models: This technique uses carefully crafted prompts to guide the LLM towards safer outputs. The prompts are designed to steer the model away from generating harmful content while still allowing it to perform useful tasks.
-
MLLM Protector: Ensuring MLLMS Safety Without Hurting: The MLLM Protector aims to protect the LLM's safety without significantly degrading its overall performance. It introduces a safety module that can be seamlessly integrated into the LLM architecture.
-
Mitigating Exaggerated Safety Large Language Models: The researchers also explore the challenge of ensuring the LLM's safety measures don't overly restrict its capabilities. They investigate techniques to balance safety and performance, such as adjusting the sensitivity of the safety mechanisms.
The paper evaluates these approaches through extensive experiments, measuring the models' ability to identify and refuse unsafe requests while maintaining their overall language generation capabilities. The results indicate that these techniques can effectively improve the safety of LLMs without compromising their utility.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a thoughtful and comprehensive approach to improving the safety of large language models (LLMs). The proposed methods, such as [object Object] and [object Object], offer promising ways to enable LLMs to recognize and refuse potentially harmful requests.
One potential limitation is the challenge of [object Object] – ensuring that the safety measures don't overly restrict the LLM's capabilities. The researchers acknowledge this issue and explore techniques to balance safety and performance, but further research may be needed to find the optimal balance.
Additionally, the paper does not delve into the broader societal implications of these safety measures. While improving LLM safety is crucial, it will be important to consider how these techniques could impact things like accessibility, democratic discourse, and the distribution of power in the digital world.
Overall, this paper makes a valuable contribution to the ongoing effort to make large language models more safe and responsible. The proposed approaches are well-designed and merit further investigation, but the research community should continue to think critically about the social and ethical implications of these technologies.
Conclusion
This research paper presents several innovative approaches to improving the safety of large language models (LLMs) by enabling them to refuse potentially unsafe requests. The key idea is to train LLMs to recognize and reject prompts that could lead to harmful outputs, such as hate speech or misinformation.
The proposed techniques, including [object Object], [object Object], and [object Object], offer promising ways to make LLMs more responsible and trustworthy. The researchers also explore approaches like [object Object] and [object Object] to balance safety and performance.
As large language models become more pervasive in our lives, it is crucial that we develop effective safeguards to protect against their misuse. This research represents an important step in that direction, and the insights it provides can help guide the continued development of safe and responsible AI systems.
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
Refusing Safe Prompts for Multi-modal Large Language Models
Zedian Shao, Hongbin Liu, Yuepeng Hu, Neil Zhenqiang Gong
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have become the cornerstone of today's generative AI ecosystem, sparking intense competition among tech giants and startups. In particular, an MLLM generates a text response given a prompt consisting of an image and a question. While state-of-the-art MLLMs use safety filters and alignment techniques to refuse unsafe prompts, in this work, we introduce MLLM-Refusal, the first method that induces refusals for safe prompts. In particular, our MLLM-Refusal optimizes a nearly-imperceptible refusal perturbation and adds it to an image, causing target MLLMs to likely refuse a safe prompt containing the perturbed image and a safe question. Specifically, we formulate MLLM-Refusal as a constrained optimization problem and propose an algorithm to solve it. Our method offers competitive advantages for MLLM model providers by potentially disrupting user experiences of competing MLLMs, since competing MLLM's users will receive unexpected refusals when they unwittingly use these perturbed images in their prompts. We evaluate MLLM-Refusal on four MLLMs across four datasets, demonstrating its effectiveness in causing competing MLLMs to refuse safe prompts while not affecting non-competing MLLMs. Furthermore, we explore three potential countermeasures-adding Gaussian noise, DiffPure, and adversarial training. Our results show that though they can mitigate MLLM-Refusal's effectiveness, they also sacrifice the accuracy and/or efficiency of the competing MLLM. The code is available at https://github.com/Sadcardation/MLLM-Refusal.
Read more9/9/2024
0
Refuse Whenever You Feel Unsafe: Improving Safety in LLMs via Decoupled Refusal Training
Youliang Yuan, Wenxiang Jiao, Wenxuan Wang, Jen-tse Huang, Jiahao Xu, Tian Liang, Pinjia He, Zhaopeng Tu
This study addresses a critical gap in safety tuning practices for Large Language Models (LLMs) by identifying and tackling a refusal position bias within safety tuning data, which compromises the models' ability to appropriately refuse generating unsafe content. We introduce a novel approach, Decoupled Refusal Training (DeRTa), designed to empower LLMs to refuse compliance to harmful prompts at any response position, significantly enhancing their safety capabilities. DeRTa incorporates two novel components: (1) Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) with Harmful Response Prefix, which trains models to recognize and avoid unsafe content by appending a segment of harmful response to the beginning of a safe response, and (2) Reinforced Transition Optimization (RTO), which equips models with the ability to transition from potential harm to safety refusal consistently throughout the harmful response sequence. Our empirical evaluation, conducted using LLaMA3 and Mistral model families across six attack scenarios, demonstrates that our method not only improves model safety without compromising performance but also surpasses well-known models such as GPT-4 in defending against attacks. Importantly, our approach successfully defends recent advanced attack methods (e.g., CodeAttack) that have jailbroken GPT-4 and LLaMA3-70B-Instruct. Our code and data can be found at https://github.com/RobustNLP/DeRTa.
Read more7/15/2024
💬
146
Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Direction
Andy Arditi, Oscar Obeso, Aaquib Syed, Daniel Paleka, Nina Panickssery, Wes Gurnee, Neel Nanda
Conversational large language models are fine-tuned for both instruction-following and safety, resulting in models that obey benign requests but refuse harmful ones. While this refusal behavior is widespread across chat models, its underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. In this work, we show that refusal is mediated by a one-dimensional subspace, across 13 popular open-source chat models up to 72B parameters in size. Specifically, for each model, we find a single direction such that erasing this direction from the model's residual stream activations prevents it from refusing harmful instructions, while adding this direction elicits refusal on even harmless instructions. Leveraging this insight, we propose a novel white-box jailbreak method that surgically disables refusal with minimal effect on other capabilities. Finally, we mechanistically analyze how adversarial suffixes suppress propagation of the refusal-mediating direction. Our findings underscore the brittleness of current safety fine-tuning methods. More broadly, our work showcases how an understanding of model internals can be leveraged to develop practical methods for controlling model behavior.
Read more7/16/2024
0
Automatic Pseudo-Harmful Prompt Generation for Evaluating False Refusals in Large Language Models
Bang An, Sicheng Zhu, Ruiyi Zhang, Michael-Andrei Panaitescu-Liess, Yuancheng Xu, Furong Huang
Safety-aligned large language models (LLMs) sometimes falsely refuse pseudo-harmful prompts, like how to kill a mosquito, which are actually harmless. Frequent false refusals not only frustrate users but also provoke a public backlash against the very values alignment seeks to protect. In this paper, we propose the first method to auto-generate diverse, content-controlled, and model-dependent pseudo-harmful prompts. Using this method, we construct an evaluation dataset called PHTest, which is ten times larger than existing datasets, covers more false refusal patterns, and separately labels controversial prompts. We evaluate 20 LLMs on PHTest, uncovering new insights due to its scale and labeling. Our findings reveal a trade-off between minimizing false refusals and improving safety against jailbreak attacks. Moreover, we show that many jailbreak defenses significantly increase the false refusal rates, thereby undermining usability. Our method and dataset can help developers evaluate and fine-tune safer and more usable LLMs. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/umd-huang-lab/FalseRefusal
Read more9/4/2024