To date, toxicity mitigation in language models has almost entirely been focused on single-language settings. As language models embrace multilingual capabilities, it's crucial our safety measures keep pace. Recognizing this research gap, our approach expands the scope of conventional toxicity mitigation to address the complexities presented by multiple languages. In the absence of sufficient annotated datasets across languages, we employ translated data to evaluate and enhance our mitigation techniques. We also compare finetuning mitigation approaches against retrieval-augmented techniques under both static and continual toxicity mitigation scenarios. This allows us to examine the effects of translation quality and the cross-lingual transfer on toxicity mitigation. We also explore how model size and data quantity affect the success of these mitigation efforts. Covering nine languages, our study represents a broad array of linguistic families and levels of resource availability, ranging from high to mid-resource languages. Through comprehensive experiments, we provide insights into the complexities of multilingual toxicity mitigation, offering valuable insights and paving the way for future research in this increasingly important field. Code and data are available at https://github.com/for-ai/goodtriever.
This paper studies the evolving domain of Continual Learning (CL) in large language models (LLMs), with a focus on developing strategies for efficient and sustainable training. Our primary emphasis is on continual domain-adaptive pretraining, a process designed to equip LLMs with the ability to integrate new information from various domains while retaining previously learned knowledge and enhancing cross-domain knowledge transfer without relying on domain-specific identification. Unlike previous studies, which mostly concentrate on a limited selection of tasks or domains and primarily aim to address the issue of forgetting, our research evaluates the adaptability and capabilities of LLMs to changing data landscapes in practical scenarios. To this end, we introduce a new benchmark designed to measure the adaptability of LLMs to these evolving data environments, offering a comprehensive framework for evaluation. We examine the impact of model size on learning efficacy and forgetting, as well as how the progression and similarity of emerging domains affect the knowledge transfer within these models. Our findings uncover several key insights: (i) when the sequence of domains shows semantic similarity, continual pretraining enables LLMs to better specialize in the current domain compared to stand-alone fine-tuning, (ii) training across a diverse range of domains enhances both backward and forward knowledge transfer, and (iii) smaller models are particularly sensitive to continual pretraining, showing the most significant rates of both forgetting and learning. We posit that our research marks a shift towards establishing a more realistic benchmark for investigating CL in LLMs, and has the potential to play a key role in guiding the direction of future research in the field.
In Natural Language Processing (NLP), the Elo rating system, originally designed for ranking players in dynamic games such as chess, is increasingly being used to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) through "A vs B" paired comparisons. However, while popular, the system's suitability for assessing entities with constant skill levels, such as LLMs, remains relatively unexplored. We study two fundamental axioms that evaluation methods should adhere to: reliability and transitivity. We conduct extensive evaluation of Elo behaviour, illustrating that individual Elo computations exhibit volatility and delving into the impact of varying the Elo rating system's hyperparameters. We show that these axioms are not always satisfied raising questions about the reliability of current comparative evaluations of LLMs. If the current use of Elo scores is intended to substitute the costly head-to-head comparison of LLMs, it is crucial to ensure the ranking is as robust as possible. Guided by the axioms, our findings offer concrete guidelines for enhancing the reliability of LLM evaluation methods, suggesting a need for reassessment of existing comparative approaches.
Human evaluation is increasingly critical for assessing large language models, capturing linguistic nuances, and reflecting user preferences more accurately than traditional automated metrics. However, the resource-intensive nature of this type of annotation process poses significant challenges. The key question driving our work: "is it feasible to minimize human-in-the-loop feedback by prioritizing data instances which most effectively distinguish between models?" We evaluate several metric-based methods and find that these metrics enhance the efficiency of human evaluations by minimizing the number of required annotations, thus saving time and cost, while ensuring a robust performance evaluation. We show that our method is effective across widely used model families, reducing instances of indecisive (or "tie") outcomes by up to 54% compared to a random sample when focusing on the top-20 percentile of prioritized instances. This potential reduction in required human effort positions our approach as a valuable strategy in future large language model evaluations.
Considerable effort has been dedicated to mitigating toxicity, but existing methods often require drastic modifications to model parameters or the use of computationally intensive auxiliary models. Furthermore, previous approaches have often neglected the crucial factor of language's evolving nature over time. In this work, we present a comprehensive perspective on toxicity mitigation that takes into account its changing nature. We introduce Goodtriever, a flexible methodology that matches the current state-of-the-art toxicity mitigation while achieving 43% relative latency reduction during inference and being more computationally efficient. By incorporating a retrieval-based approach at decoding time, Goodtriever enables toxicity-controlled text generation. Our research advocates for an increased focus on adaptable mitigation techniques, which better reflect the data drift models face when deployed in the wild. Code and data are available at https://github.com/for-ai/goodtriever.
Perception of toxicity evolves over time and often differs between geographies and cultural backgrounds. Similarly, black-box commercially available APIs for detecting toxicity, such as the Perspective API, are not static, but frequently retrained to address any unattended weaknesses and biases. We evaluate the implications of these changes on the reproducibility of findings that compare the relative merits of models and methods that aim to curb toxicity. Our findings suggest that research that relied on inherited automatic toxicity scores to compare models and techniques may have resulted in inaccurate findings. Rescoring all models from HELM, a widely respected living benchmark, for toxicity with the recent version of the API led to a different ranking of widely used foundation models. We suggest caution in applying apples-to-apples comparisons between studies and lay recommendations for a more structured approach to evaluating toxicity over time. Code and data are available at https://github.com/for-ai/black-box-api-challenges.
Hyperparameter optimization (HPO) and neural architecture search (NAS) are methods of choice to obtain the best-in-class machine learning models, but in practice they can be costly to run. When models are trained on large datasets, tuning them with HPO or NAS rapidly becomes prohibitively expensive for practitioners, even when efficient multi-fidelity methods are employed. We propose an approach to tackle the challenge of tuning machine learning models trained on large datasets with limited computational resources. Our approach, named PASHA, is able to dynamically allocate maximum resources for the tuning procedure depending on the need. The experimental comparison shows that PASHA identifies well-performing hyperparameter configurations and architectures while consuming significantly fewer computational resources than solutions like ASHA.
In many real-world scenarios, data to train machine learning models become available over time. However, neural network models struggle to continually learn new concepts without forgetting what has been learnt in the past. This phenomenon is known as catastrophic forgetting and it is often difficult to prevent due to practical constraints, such as the amount of data that can be stored or the limited computation sources that can be used. Moreover, training large neural networks, such as Transformers, from scratch is very costly and requires a vast amount of training data, which might not be available in the application domain of interest. A recent trend indicates that dynamic architectures based on an expansion of the parameters can reduce catastrophic forgetting efficiently in continual learning, but this needs complex tuning to balance the growing number of parameters and barely share any information across tasks. As a result, they struggle to scale to a large number of tasks without significant overhead. In this paper, we validate in the computer vision domain a recent solution called Adaptive Distillation of Adapters (ADA), which is developed to perform continual learning using pre-trained Transformers and Adapters on text classification tasks. We empirically demonstrate on different classification tasks that this method maintains a good predictive performance without retraining the model or increasing the number of model parameters over the time. Besides it is significantly faster at inference time compared to the state-of-the-art methods.
Learning text classifiers based on pre-trained language models has become the standard practice in natural language processing applications. Unfortunately, training large neural language models, such as transformers, from scratch is very costly and requires a vast amount of training data, which might not be available in the application domain of interest. Moreover, in many real-world scenarios, classes are uncovered as more data is seen, calling for class-incremental modelling approaches. In this work we devise a method to perform text classification using pre-trained models on a sequence of classification tasks provided in sequence. We formalize the problem as a continual learning problem where the algorithm learns new tasks without performance degradation on the previous ones and without re-training the model from scratch. We empirically demonstrate that our method requires significantly less model parameters compared to other state of the art methods and that it is significantly faster at inference time. The tight control on the number of model parameters, and so the memory, is not only improving efficiency. It is making possible the usage of the algorithm in real-world applications where deploying a solution with a constantly increasing memory consumption is just unrealistic. While our method suffers little forgetting, it retains a predictive performance on-par with state of the art but less memory efficient methods.
Personalization is a crucial aspect of many online experiences. In particular, content ranking is often a key component in delivering sophisticated personalization results. Commonly, supervised learning-to-rank methods are applied, which suffer from bias introduced during data collection by production systems in charge of producing the ranking. To compensate for this problem, we leverage contextual multi-armed bandits. We propose novel extensions of two well-known algorithms viz. LinUCB and Linear Thompson Sampling to the ranking use-case. To account for the biases in a production environment, we employ the position-based click model. Finally, we show the validity of the proposed algorithms by conducting extensive offline experiments on synthetic datasets as well as customer facing online A/B experiments.