Understanding the Learning Dynamics of Alignment with Human Feedback
2403.18742
0
0
Abstract
Aligning large language models (LLMs) with human intentions has become a critical task for safely deploying models in real-world systems. While existing alignment approaches have seen empirical success, theoretically understanding how these methods affect model behavior remains an open question. Our work provides an initial attempt to theoretically analyze the learning dynamics of human preference alignment. We formally show how the distribution of preference datasets influences the rate of model updates and provide rigorous guarantees on the training accuracy. Our theory also reveals an intricate phenomenon where the optimization is prone to prioritizing certain behaviors with higher preference distinguishability. We empirically validate our findings on contemporary LLMs and alignment tasks, reinforcing our theoretical insights and shedding light on considerations for future alignment approaches. Disclaimer: This paper contains potentially offensive text; reader discretion is advised.
Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:
Overview
- This paper explores the dynamics of aligning AI systems with human feedback, investigating how the learning process evolves over time.
- The researchers examine the convergence and stability properties of different alignment algorithms, providing insights into how these systems can be effectively trained to behave in accordance with human preferences.
- The findings have implications for the development of safe and ethical AI systems that can reliably act in the best interests of humans.
Plain English Explanation
The paper looks at how AI systems can be trained to behave in a way that aligns with what humans want. This is an important challenge, as we want these powerful AI technologies to be beneficial and trustworthy.
The researchers investigate different techniques for aligning the AI's behavior with human feedback. They study how the AI's learning process changes over time, and whether the system converges to a stable and desirable state. This helps shed light on the best ways to train AI systems to reliably act in accordance with human preferences, as described in this related work.
For example, imagine an AI assistant that helps with everyday tasks. We want to make sure it learns to do those tasks in a way that is helpful and aligned with what its human users want, rather than pursuing its own agenda. The insights from this paper can inform the development of such systems, ensuring they reliably follow instructions and remain safely and ethically aligned with human values over time.
Technical Explanation
The paper investigates the learning dynamics of AI systems that are trained using human feedback, such as reward modeling or preference learning. The researchers analyze the convergence and stability properties of different alignment algorithms, studying how the AI's behavior evolves as it receives more human feedback.
They consider a setup where the AI agent interacts with a human supervisor who provides feedback on the agent's actions. The goal is for the agent to learn a policy that maximizes the human's reward function, even though this function is initially unknown to the agent.
The paper presents theoretical results characterizing the conditions under which the agent's policy will converge to a stable, aligned state. The researchers also investigate the speed of convergence and the resilience of the learned policy to perturbations, exploring factors that can impact the robustness of the alignment.
Through this analysis, the paper provides insights into effective strategies for training AI systems to behave in a way that reliably satisfies human preferences over the long term.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes important theoretical contributions to understanding the alignment of AI systems with human feedback. However, the analysis relies on several simplifying assumptions, such as a well-defined and stationary human reward function, that may not always hold in real-world scenarios.
Additionally, the paper focuses on convergence and stability properties, but does not address other crucial aspects of alignment, such as the initial exploration phase, where the AI agent may exhibit undesirable behavior before learning the correct policy. Further research is needed to understand the full lifecycle of these systems and how to ensure safe exploration.
The paper also does not consider potential issues like reward hacking, where the AI agent finds unintuitive ways to maximize the reward function in unintended ways. Addressing such challenges will be crucial for developing AI systems that are truly aligned with human values and interests.
Overall, while the paper provides valuable theoretical insights, more work is needed to translate these findings into practical strategies for building safe and trustworthy AI assistants that can reliably act in accordance with human preferences over extended periods of time.
Conclusion
This paper offers important insights into the learning dynamics of AI systems that are trained using human feedback. By analyzing the convergence and stability properties of different alignment algorithms, the researchers shed light on effective strategies for developing AI agents that reliably behave in accordance with human preferences.
The findings have significant implications for the field of AI safety and ethics, as they can inform the design of AI systems that are both capable and trustworthy. As these powerful technologies continue to advance, ensuring their alignment with human values will be crucial for realizing their full potential to benefit society.
The insights from this paper represent an important step forward in our understanding of how to create AI assistants that can be safely and reliably deployed to assist and empower humans in a wide range of domains.
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
💬
Aligning language models with human preferences
Tomasz Korbak
0
0
Language models (LMs) trained on vast quantities of text data can acquire sophisticated skills such as generating summaries, answering questions or generating code. However, they also manifest behaviors that violate human preferences, e.g., they can generate offensive content, falsehoods or perpetuate social biases. In this thesis, I explore several approaches to aligning LMs with human preferences. First, I argue that aligning LMs can be seen as Bayesian inference: conditioning a prior (base, pretrained LM) on evidence about human preferences (Chapter 2). Conditioning on human preferences can be implemented in numerous ways. In Chapter 3, I investigate the relation between two approaches to finetuning pretrained LMs using feedback given by a scoring function: reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) and distribution matching. I show that RLHF can be seen as a special case of distribution matching but distributional matching is strictly more general. In chapter 4, I show how to extend the distribution matching to conditional language models. Finally, in chapter 5 I explore a different root: conditioning an LM on human preferences already during pretraining. I show that involving human feedback from the very start tends to be more effective than using it only during supervised finetuning. Overall, these results highlight the room for alignment techniques different from and complementary to RLHF.
4/19/2024
💬
The Real, the Better: Aligning Large Language Models with Online Human Behaviors
Guanying Jiang, Lingyong Yan, Haibo Shi, Dawei Yin
0
0
Large language model alignment is widely used and studied to avoid LLM producing unhelpful and harmful responses. However, the lengthy training process and predefined preference bias hinder adaptation to online diverse human preferences. To this end, this paper proposes an alignment framework, called Reinforcement Learning with Human Behavior (RLHB), to align LLMs by directly leveraging real online human behaviors. By taking the generative adversarial framework, the generator is trained to respond following expected human behavior; while the discriminator tries to verify whether the triplets of query, response, and human behavior come from real online environments. Behavior modeling in natural-language form and the multi-model joint training mechanism enable an active and sustainable online alignment. Experimental results confirm the effectiveness of our proposed methods by both human and automatic evaluations.
5/2/2024
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
0
0
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}.
5/7/2024
More RLHF, More Trust? On The Impact of Human Preference Alignment On Language Model Trustworthiness
Aaron J. Li, Satyapriya Krishna, Himabindu Lakkaraju
0
0
The surge in Large Language Models (LLMs) development has led to improved performance on cognitive tasks as well as an urgent need to align these models with human values in order to safely exploit their power. Despite the effectiveness of preference learning algorithms like Reinforcement Learning From Human Feedback (RLHF) in aligning human preferences, their assumed improvements on model trustworthiness haven't been thoroughly testified. Toward this end, this study investigates how models that have been aligned with general-purpose preference data on helpfulness and harmlessness perform across five trustworthiness verticals: toxicity, stereotypical bias, machine ethics, truthfulness, and privacy. For model alignment, we focus on three widely used RLHF variants: Supervised Finetuning (SFT), Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). Through extensive empirical investigations, we discover that the improvement in trustworthiness by RLHF is far from guaranteed, and there exists a complex interplay between preference data, alignment algorithms, and specific trustworthiness aspects. Together, our results underscore the need for more nuanced approaches for model alignment. By shedding light on the intricate dynamics of these components within model alignment, we hope this research will guide the community towards developing language models that are both capable and trustworthy.
4/30/2024