The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Easy Training Data for Hard Tasks
0
Sign in to get full access
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 Unreasonable Effectiveness of Easy Training Data for Hard Tasks
Peter Hase, Mohit Bansal, Peter Clark, Sarah Wiegreffe
How can we train models to perform well on hard test data when hard training data is by definition difficult to label correctly? This question has been termed the scalable oversight problem and has drawn increasing attention as language models have continually improved. In this paper, we present the surprising conclusion that current pretrained language models often generalize relatively well from easy to hard data, even performing as well as oracle models finetuned on hard data. We demonstrate this kind of easy-to-hard generalization using simple finetuning methods like in-context learning, linear classifier heads, and QLoRA for seven different measures of datapoint hardness, including six empirically diverse human hardness measures (like grade level) and one model-based measure (loss-based). Furthermore, we show that even if one cares most about model performance on hard data, it can be better to collect easy data rather than hard data for finetuning, since hard data is generally noisier and costlier to collect. Our experiments use open models up to 70b in size and four publicly available question-answering datasets with questions ranging in difficulty from 3rd grade science questions to college level STEM questions and general-knowledge trivia. We conclude that easy-to-hard generalization in LMs is surprisingly strong for the tasks studied. Our code is available at: https://github.com/allenai/easy-to-hard-generalization
Read more6/6/2024
0
New!Zero-to-Strong Generalization: Eliciting Strong Capabilities of Large Language Models Iteratively without Gold Labels
Chaoqun Liu, Qin Chao, Wenxuan Zhang, Xiaobao Wu, Boyang Li, Anh Tuan Luu, Lidong Bing
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance through supervised fine-tuning or in-context learning using gold labels. However, this paradigm is limited by the availability of gold labels, while in certain scenarios, LLMs may need to perform tasks that are too complex for humans to provide such labels. To tackle this challenge, this study explores whether solely utilizing unlabeled data can elicit strong model capabilities. We propose a new paradigm termed zero-to-strong generalization. We iteratively prompt LLMs to annotate unlabeled data and retain high-quality labels by filtering. Surprisingly, we obverse that this iterative process gradually unlocks LLMs' potential on downstream tasks. Our experiments on extensive classification and reasoning tasks confirm the effectiveness of our proposed framework. Our analysis indicates that this paradigm is effective for both in-context learning and fine-tuning, and for various model sizes.
Read more9/20/2024
0
Can Large Language Models Always Solve Easy Problems if They Can Solve Harder Ones?
Zhe Yang, Yichang Zhang, Tianyu Liu, Jian Yang, Junyang Lin, Chang Zhou, Zhifang Sui
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities, but still suffer from inconsistency issues (e.g. LLMs can react differently to disturbances like rephrasing or inconsequential order change). In addition to these inconsistencies, we also observe that LLMs, while capable of solving hard problems, can paradoxically fail at easier ones. To evaluate this hard-to-easy inconsistency, we develop the ConsisEval benchmark, where each entry comprises a pair of questions with a strict order of difficulty. Furthermore, we introduce the concept of consistency score to quantitatively measure this inconsistency and analyze the potential for improvement in consistency by relative consistency score. Based on comprehensive experiments across a variety of existing models, we find: (1) GPT-4 achieves the highest consistency score of 92.2% but is still inconsistent to specific questions due to distraction by redundant information, misinterpretation of questions, etc.; (2) models with stronger capabilities typically exhibit higher consistency, but exceptions also exist; (3) hard data enhances consistency for both fine-tuning and in-context learning. Our data and code will be publicly available on GitHub.
Read more6/19/2024
0
Quantifying the Gain in Weak-to-Strong Generalization
Moses Charikar, Chirag Pabbaraju, Kirankumar Shiragur
Recent advances in large language models have shown capabilities that are extraordinary and near-superhuman. These models operate with such complexity that reliably evaluating and aligning them proves challenging for humans. This leads to the natural question: can guidance from weak models (like humans) adequately direct the capabilities of strong models? In a recent and somewhat surprising work, Burns et al. (2023) empirically demonstrated that when strong models (like GPT-4) are finetuned using labels generated by weak supervisors (like GPT-2), the strong models outperform their weaker counterparts -- a phenomenon they term weak-to-strong generalization. In this work, we present a theoretical framework for understanding weak-to-strong generalization. Specifically, we show that the improvement in performance achieved by strong models over their weaker counterparts is quantified by the misfit error incurred by the strong model on labels generated by the weaker model. Our theory reveals several curious algorithmic insights. For instance, we can predict the amount by which the strong model will improve over the weak model, and also choose among different weak models to train the strong model, based on its misfit error. We validate our theoretical findings through various empirical assessments.
Read more5/27/2024