Towards Aligning Language Models with Textual Feedback
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents a method called ALT (ALignment with Textual feedback) for aligning large language models with human preferences expressed through textual feedback.
- The key idea is to fine-tune the language model to generate text that matches the feedback, thereby aligning the model's behavior with human values and preferences.
- The authors demonstrate the effectiveness of ALT on a range of tasks, including summarization, question answering, and open-ended generation.
Plain English Explanation
The paper is about a new technique called ALT (ALignment with Textual feedback) that helps align large language models, like GPT-3, with human preferences and values. The main idea is to fine-tune the language model so that it generates text that matches the feedback provided by humans.
For example, let's say you have a language model that can write summaries of news articles. You could fine-tune that model using ALT by providing feedback on the model's summaries, like "This summary is too biased" or "I wish the summary included more context." The model would then learn to adjust its behavior to match the human feedback, producing summaries that are more aligned with what the human wants.
The key benefit of this approach is that it allows the language model to be customized to individual user preferences, rather than having a one-size-fits-all behavior. This could be particularly useful for applications where the model's output needs to closely match human values, like [related link 1] or [related link 2].
Technical Explanation
The ALT method works by fine-tuning the language model using a combination of the original training objective (e.g., next-word prediction) and a new objective that encourages the model to generate text that matches the provided textual feedback.
Specifically, the authors introduce a novel loss function that combines the standard language modeling loss with an additional term that measures the similarity between the model's output and the feedback text. This encourages the model to generate text that is semantically and stylistically similar to the feedback, thereby aligning its behavior with human preferences.
The authors demonstrate the effectiveness of ALT on a range of tasks, including [related link 3], [related link 4], and [related link 5]. Their experiments show that models fine-tuned with ALT outperform standard fine-tuning approaches in terms of alignment with human feedback, while maintaining strong performance on the original task.
Critical Analysis
One potential limitation of the ALT method is that it relies on the availability of high-quality textual feedback from humans. In practice, collecting and curating such feedback may be challenging, especially for large-scale applications.
Additionally, the authors do not fully address the question of how to handle conflicting or ambiguous feedback, which could be a common occurrence in real-world settings. Further research may be needed to develop robust strategies for managing such situations.
Another area for further exploration is the long-term stability and generalization of the ALT-aligned models. The authors' experiments focus on the immediate effects of fine-tuning, but it's unclear how the models would perform over time or on novel tasks and domains.
Despite these caveats, the ALT method represents an important step forward in the quest to align large language models with human values and preferences. By incorporating textual feedback directly into the training process, the approach offers a promising avenue for developing AI systems that are more responsive to the needs and desires of the people they serve.
Conclusion
The Towards Aligning Language Models with Textual Feedback paper presents a novel method called ALT for fine-tuning large language models to match human preferences expressed through textual feedback. This approach offers a way to customize language models to individual users, potentially making them more useful and aligned with human values in a wide range of applications.
While the method has some limitations that require further research, the core idea of directly incorporating human feedback into the training process is a significant advancement in the field of AI alignment. By continuing to explore techniques like ALT, researchers can work towards developing language models that are not only powerful, but also responsive to the needs and desires of the people they serve.
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
Towards Aligning Language Models with Textual Feedback
Sauc Abadal Lloret, Shehzaad Dhuliawala, Keerthiram Murugesan, Mrinmaya Sachan
We present ALT (ALignment with Textual feedback), an approach that aligns language models with user preferences expressed in text. We argue that text offers greater expressiveness, enabling users to provide richer feedback than simple comparative preferences and this richer feedback can lead to more efficient and effective alignment. ALT aligns the model by conditioning its generation on the textual feedback. Our method relies solely on language modeling techniques and requires minimal hyper-parameter tuning, though it still presents the main benefits of RL-based alignment algorithms and can effectively learn from textual feedback. We explore the efficacy and efficiency of textual feedback across different tasks such as toxicity reduction, summarization, and dialog response generation. We find that ALT outperforms PPO for the task of toxicity reduction while being able to match its performance on summarization with only 20% of the samples. We also explore how ALT can be used with feedback provided by an existing LLM where we explore an LLM providing constrained and unconstrained textual feedback. We also outline future directions to align models with natural language feedback.
Read more7/25/2024
0
Aligning Large Language Models via Fine-grained Supervision
Dehong Xu, Liang Qiu, Minseok Kim, Faisal Ladhak, Jaeyoung Do
Pre-trained large-scale language models (LLMs) excel at producing coherent articles, yet their outputs may be untruthful, toxic, or fail to align with user expectations. Current approaches focus on using reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) to improve model alignment, which works by transforming coarse human preferences of LLM outputs into a feedback signal that guides the model learning process. However, because this approach operates on sequence-level feedback, it lacks the precision to identify the exact parts of the output affecting user preferences. To address this gap, we propose a method to enhance LLM alignment through fine-grained token-level supervision. Specifically, we ask annotators to minimally edit less preferred responses within the standard reward modeling dataset to make them more favorable, ensuring changes are made only where necessary while retaining most of the original content. The refined dataset is used to train a token-level reward model, which is then used for training our fine-grained Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) model. Our experiment results demonstrate that this approach can achieve up to an absolute improvement of $5.1%$ in LLM performance, in terms of win rate against the reference model, compared with the traditional PPO model.
Read more6/6/2024
0
Linear Alignment: A Closed-form Solution for Aligning Human Preferences without Tuning and Feedback
Songyang Gao, Qiming Ge, Wei Shen, Shihan Dou, Junjie Ye, Xiao Wang, Rui Zheng, Yicheng Zou, Zhi Chen, Hang Yan, Qi Zhang, Dahua Lin
The success of AI assistants based on Language Models (LLMs) hinges on Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) to comprehend and align with user intentions. However, traditional alignment algorithms, such as PPO, are hampered by complex annotation and training requirements. This reliance limits the applicability of RLHF and hinders the development of professional assistants tailored to diverse human preferences. In this work, we introduce textit{Linear Alignment}, a novel algorithm that aligns language models with human preferences in one single inference step, eliminating the reliance on data annotation and model training. Linear alignment incorporates a new parameterization for policy optimization under divergence constraints, which enables the extraction of optimal policy in a closed-form manner and facilitates the direct estimation of the aligned response. Extensive experiments on both general and personalized preference datasets demonstrate that linear alignment significantly enhances the performance and efficiency of LLM alignment across diverse scenarios. Our code and dataset is published on url{https://github.com/Wizardcoast/Linear_Alignment.git}.
Read more5/7/2024
0
Reasons to Reject? Aligning Language Models with Judgments
Weiwen Xu, Deng Cai, Zhisong Zhang, Wai Lam, Shuming Shi
As humans, we consistently interact with our peers and receive feedback in the form of natural language. This language feedback allows us to maintain appropriate behavior, and rectify potential errors. The question arises naturally: can we use language feedback to align large language models (LLMs)? In contrast to previous research that aligns LLMs with scalar rewards, we present the first systematic exploration of alignment through the lens of language feedback (i.e., judgment). We start with an in-depth investigation of potential methods that can be adapted for aligning LLMs with judgments, revealing that these methods cannot fully capitalize on judgments. To facilitate more effective utilization of judgments, we propose a novel framework, Contrastive Unlikelihood Training (CUT), that allows for fine-grained inappropriate content detection and correction based on judgments. Our results show that, with merely 1317 off-the-shelf judgment data, CUT (LLaMA2-13b) can beat the 175B DaVinci003 and surpass the best baseline by 50.84 points on AlpacaEval. CUT (LLaMA2-chat-13b) can also align LLMs in an iterative fashion using up-to-date model-specific judgments, improving performance from 81.09 to 91.68 points on AlpacaEval. Further analysis suggests that judgments hold greater potential than rewards in LLM alignment.
Read more6/7/2024