Pretrain on just structure: Understanding linguistic inductive biases using transfer learning

Both humans and transformer language models are able to learn language without explicit structural supervision. What inductive learning biases make this learning possible? In this study, we examine the effect of different inductive learning biases by predisposing language models with structural biases through pretraining on artificial structured data, and then evaluating by fine-tuning on English. Our experimental setup gives us the ability to actively control the inductive bias of language models. With our experiments, we investigate the comparative success of three types of inductive bias: 1) an inductive bias for recursive, hierarchical processing 2) an inductive bias for unrestricted token-token dependencies that can't be modeled by context-free grammars, and 3) an inductive bias for a Zipfian power-law vocabulary distribution. We show that complex token-token interactions form the best inductive biases, and that this is strongest in the non-context-free case. We also show that a Zipfian vocabulary distribution forms a good inductive bias independently from grammatical structure. Our study leverages the capabilities of transformer models to run controlled language learning experiments that are not possible to run in humans, and surfaces hypotheses about the structures that facilitate language learning in both humans and machines.

Foundation Models and Fair Use

Existing foundation models are trained on copyrighted material. Deploying these models can pose both legal and ethical risks when data creators fail to receive appropriate attribution or compensation. In the United States and several other countries, copyrighted content may be used to build foundation models without incurring liability due to the fair use doctrine. However, there is a caveat: If the model produces output that is similar to copyrighted data, particularly in scenarios that affect the market of that data, fair use may no longer apply to the output of the model. In this work, we emphasize that fair use is not guaranteed, and additional work may be necessary to keep model development and deployment squarely in the realm of fair use. First, we survey the potential risks of developing and deploying foundation models based on copyrighted content. We review relevant U.S. case law, drawing parallels to existing and potential applications for generating text, source code, and visual art. Experiments confirm that popular foundation models can generate content considerably similar to copyrighted material. Second, we discuss technical mitigations that can help foundation models stay in line with fair use. We argue that more research is needed to align mitigation strategies with the current state of the law. Lastly, we suggest that the law and technical mitigations should co-evolve. For example, coupled with other policy mechanisms, the law could more explicitly consider safe harbors when strong technical tools are used to mitigate infringement harms. This co-evolution may help strike a balance between intellectual property and innovation, which speaks to the original goal of fair use. But we emphasize that the strategies we describe here are not a panacea and more work is needed to develop policies that address the potential harms of foundation models.

Navigating the Grey Area: Expressions of Overconfidence and Uncertainty in Language Models

Despite increasingly fluent, relevant, and coherent language generation, major gaps remain between how humans and machines use language. We argue that a key dimension that is missing from our understanding of language models (LMs) is the model's ability to interpret and generate expressions of uncertainty. Whether it be the weatherperson announcing a chance of rain or a doctor giving a diagnosis, information is often not black-and-white and expressions of uncertainty provide nuance to support human-decision making. The increasing deployment of LMs in the wild motivates us to investigate whether LMs are capable of interpreting expressions of uncertainty and how LMs' behaviors change when learning to emit their own expressions of uncertainty. When injecting expressions of uncertainty into prompts (e.g., "I think the answer is..."), we discover that GPT3's generations vary upwards of 80% in accuracy based on the expression used. We analyze the linguistic characteristics of these expressions and find a drop in accuracy when naturalistic expressions of certainty are present. We find similar effects when teaching models to emit their own expressions of uncertainty, where model calibration suffers when teaching models to emit certainty rather than uncertainty. Together, these results highlight the challenges of building LMs that interpret and generate trustworthy expressions of uncertainty.

Leveraging supplementary text data to kick-start automatic speech recognition system development with limited transcriptions

Recent research using pre-trained transformer models suggests that just 10 minutes of transcribed speech may be enough to fine-tune such a model for automatic speech recognition (ASR) -- at least if we can also leverage vast amounts of text data (803 million tokens). But is that much text data necessary? We study the use of different amounts of text data, both for creating a lexicon that constrains ASR decoding to possible words (e.g. *dogz vs. dogs), and for training larger language models that bias the system toward probable word sequences (e.g. too dogs vs. two dogs). We perform experiments using 10 minutes of transcribed speech from English (for replicating prior work) and two additional pairs of languages differing in the availability of supplemental text data: Gronings and Frisian (~7.5M token corpora available), and Besemah and Nasal (only small lexica available). For all languages, we found that using only a lexicon did not appreciably improve ASR performance. For Gronings and Frisian, we found that lexica and language models derived from 'novel-length' 80k token subcorpora reduced the word error rate (WER) to 39% on average. Our findings suggest that where a text corpus in the upper tens of thousands of tokens or more is available, fine-tuning a transformer model with just tens of minutes of transcribed speech holds some promise towards obtaining human-correctable transcriptions near the 30% WER rule-of-thumb.

Self-Destructing Models: Increasing the Costs of Harmful Dual Uses in Foundation Models

A growing ecosystem of large, open-source foundation models has reduced the labeled data and technical expertise necessary to apply machine learning to many new problems. Yet foundation models pose a clear dual-use risk, indiscriminately reducing the costs of building both harmful and beneficial machine learning systems. To mitigate this risk, we propose the task blocking paradigm, in which foundation models are trained with an additional mechanism to impede adaptation to harmful tasks while retaining good performance on desired tasks. We call the resulting models self-destructing models, inspired by mechanisms that prevent adversaries from using tools for harmful purposes. We present an algorithm for training self-destructing models leveraging techniques from meta-learning and adversarial learning, showing that it can largely prevent a BERT-based model from learning to perform gender identification without harming the model's ability to perform profession classification. We conclude with a discussion of future directions.

Picking on the Same Person: Does Algorithmic Monoculture lead to Outcome Homogenization?

As the scope of machine learning broadens, we observe a recurring theme of algorithmic monoculture: the same systems, or systems that share components (e.g. training data), are deployed by multiple decision-makers. While sharing offers clear advantages (e.g. amortizing costs), does it bear risks? We introduce and formalize one such risk, outcome homogenization: the extent to which particular individuals or groups experience negative outcomes from all decision-makers. If the same individuals or groups exclusively experience undesirable outcomes, this may institutionalize systemic exclusion and reinscribe social hierarchy. To relate algorithmic monoculture and outcome homogenization, we propose the component-sharing hypothesis: if decision-makers share components like training data or specific models, then they will produce more homogeneous outcomes. We test this hypothesis on algorithmic fairness benchmarks, demonstrating that sharing training data reliably exacerbates homogenization, with individual-level effects generally exceeding group-level effects. Further, given the dominant paradigm in AI of foundation models, i.e. models that can be adapted for myriad downstream tasks, we test whether model sharing homogenizes outcomes across tasks. We observe mixed results: we find that for both vision and language settings, the specific methods for adapting a foundation model significantly influence the degree of outcome homogenization. We conclude with philosophical analyses of and societal challenges for outcome homogenization, with an eye towards implications for deployed machine learning systems.

Follow the Wisdom of the Crowd: Effective Text Generation via Minimum Bayes Risk Decoding

In open-ended natural-language generation, existing text decoding methods typically struggle to produce text which is both diverse and high-quality. Greedy and beam search are known to suffer from text degeneration and linguistic diversity issues, while temperature, top-k, and nucleus sampling often yield diverse but low-quality outputs. In this work, we present crowd sampling, a family of decoding methods based on Bayesian risk minimization, to address this diversity-quality trade-off. Inspired by the principle of "the wisdom of the crowd," crowd sampling seeks to select a candidate from a pool of candidates that has the least expected risk (i.e., highest expected reward) under a generative model according to a given utility function. Crowd sampling can be seen as a generalization of numerous existing methods, including majority voting, and in practice, it can be used as a drop-in replacement for existing sampling methods. Extensive experiments show that crowd sampling delivers improvements of 3-7 ROUGE and BLEU points across a wide range of tasks, including summarization, data-to-text, translation, and textual style transfer, while achieving new state-of-the-art results on WebNLG and WMT'16.

Easily Accessible Text-to-Image Generation Amplifies Demographic Stereotypes at Large Scale

Machine learning models are now able to convert user-written text descriptions into naturalistic images. These models are available to anyone online and are being used to generate millions of images a day. We investigate these models and find that they amplify dangerous and complex stereotypes. Moreover, we find that the amplified stereotypes are difficult to predict and not easily mitigated by users or model owners. The extent to which these image-generation models perpetuate and amplify stereotypes and their mass deployment is cause for serious concern.

Multilingual BERT has an accent: Evaluating English influences on fluency in multilingual models

While multilingual language models can improve NLP performance on low-resource languages by leveraging higher-resource languages, they also reduce average performance on all languages (the 'curse of multilinguality'). Here we show another problem with multilingual models: grammatical structures in higher-resource languages bleed into lower-resource languages, a phenomenon we call grammatical structure bias. We show this bias via a novel method for comparing the fluency of multilingual models to the fluency of monolingual Spanish and Greek models: testing their preference for two carefully-chosen variable grammatical structures (optional pronoun-drop in Spanish and optional Subject-Verb ordering in Greek). We find that multilingual BERT is biased toward the English-like setting (explicit pronouns and Subject-Verb-Object ordering) as compared to our monolingual control. With our case studies, we hope to bring to light the fine-grained ways in which dominant languages can affect and bias multilingual performance, and encourage more linguistically-aware fluency evaluation.

When and why vision-language models behave like bags-of-words, and what to do about it?

Despite the success of large vision and language models (VLMs) in many downstream applications, it is unclear how well they encode compositional information. Here, we create the Attribution, Relation, and Order (ARO) benchmark to systematically evaluate the ability of VLMs to understand different types of relationships, attributes, and order. ARO consists of Visual Genome Attribution, to test the understanding of objects' properties; Visual Genome Relation, to test for relational understanding; and COCO & Flickr30k-Order, to test for order sensitivity. ARO is orders of magnitude larger than previous benchmarks of compositionality, with more than 50,000 test cases. We show where state-of-the-art VLMs have poor relational understanding, can blunder when linking objects to their attributes, and demonstrate a severe lack of order sensitivity. VLMs are predominantly trained and evaluated on large datasets with rich compositional structure in the images and captions. Yet, training on these datasets has not been enough to address the lack of compositional understanding, and evaluating on these datasets has failed to surface this deficiency. To understand why these limitations emerge and are not represented in the standard tests, we zoom into the evaluation and training procedures. We demonstrate that it is possible to perform well on retrieval over existing datasets without using the composition and order information. Given that contrastive pretraining optimizes for retrieval on datasets with similar shortcuts, we hypothesize that this can explain why the models do not need to learn to represent compositional information. This finding suggests a natural solution: composition-aware hard negative mining. We show that a simple-to-implement modification of contrastive learning significantly improves the performance on tasks requiring understanding of order and compositionality.