Measuring and Reducing LLM Hallucination without Gold-Standard Answers via Expertise-Weighting

LLM hallucination, i.e. generating factually incorrect yet seemingly convincing answers, is currently a major threat to the trustworthiness and reliability of LLMs. The first step towards solving this complicated problem is to measure it. However, existing hallucination metrics require to have a benchmark dataset with gold-standard answers, i.e. "best" or "correct" answers written by humans. Such requirement makes hallucination measurement costly and prone to human errors. In this work, we propose Factualness Evaluations via Weighting LLMs (FEWL), the first hallucination metric that is specifically designed for the scenario when gold-standard answers are absent. FEWL leverages the answers from off-the-shelf LLMs that serve as a proxy of gold-standard answers. The key challenge is how to quantify the expertise of reference LLMs resourcefully. We show FEWL has certain theoretical guarantees and demonstrate empirically it gives more accurate hallucination measures than naively using reference LLMs. We also show how to leverage FEWL to reduce hallucination through both in-context learning and supervised finetuning. Last, we build a large-scale benchmark dataset to facilitate LLM hallucination research.

Human-Instruction-Free LLM Self-Alignment with Limited Samples

Aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values is a vital task for LLM practitioners. Current alignment techniques have several limitations: (1) requiring a large amount of annotated data; (2) demanding heavy human involvement; (3) lacking a systematic mechanism to continuously improve. In this work, we study aligning LLMs to a new domain with limited samples (e.g. < 100). We propose an algorithm that can self-align LLMs iteratively without active human involvement. Unlike existing works, our algorithm relies on neither human-crafted instructions nor labeled rewards, significantly reducing human involvement. In addition, our algorithm can self-improve the alignment continuously. The key idea is to first retrieve high-quality samples related to the target domain and use them as In-context Learning examples to generate more samples. Then we use the self-generated samples to finetune the LLM iteratively. We show that our method can unlock the LLMs' self-generalization ability to perform alignment with near-zero human supervision. We test our algorithm on three benchmarks in safety, truthfulness, and instruction-following, and show good performance in alignment, domain adaptability, and scalability.

Distributionally Robust Post-hoc Classifiers under Prior Shifts

The generalization ability of machine learning models degrades significantly when the test distribution shifts away from the training distribution. We investigate the problem of training models that are robust to shifts caused by changes in the distribution of class-priors or group-priors. The presence of skewed training priors can often lead to the models overfitting to spurious features. Unlike existing methods, which optimize for either the worst or the average performance over classes or groups, our work is motivated by the need for finer control over the robustness properties of the model. We present an extremely lightweight post-hoc approach that performs scaling adjustments to predictions from a pre-trained model, with the goal of minimizing a distributionally robust loss around a chosen target distribution. These adjustments are computed by solving a constrained optimization problem on a validation set and applied to the model during test time. Our constrained optimization objective is inspired by a natural notion of robustness to controlled distribution shifts. Our method comes with provable guarantees and empirically makes a strong case for distributional robust post-hoc classifiers. An empirical implementation is available at https://github.com/weijiaheng/Drops.

Client-side Gradient Inversion Against Federated Learning from Poisoning

Federated Learning (FL) enables distributed participants (e.g., mobile devices) to train a global model without sharing data directly to a central server. Recent studies have revealed that FL is vulnerable to gradient inversion attack (GIA), which aims to reconstruct the original training samples and poses high risk against the privacy of clients in FL. However, most existing GIAs necessitate control over the server and rely on strong prior knowledge including batch normalization and data distribution information. In this work, we propose Client-side poisoning Gradient Inversion (CGI), which is a novel attack method that can be launched from clients. For the first time, we show the feasibility of a client-side adversary with limited knowledge being able to recover the training samples from the aggregated global model. We take a distinct approach in which the adversary utilizes a malicious model that amplifies the loss of a specific targeted class of interest. When honest clients employ the poisoned global model, the gradients of samples belonging to the targeted class are magnified, making them the dominant factor in the aggregated update. This enables the adversary to effectively reconstruct the private input belonging to other clients using the aggregated update. In addition, our CGI also features its ability to remain stealthy against Byzantine-robust aggregation rules (AGRs). By optimizing malicious updates and blending benign updates with a malicious replacement vector, our method remains undetected by these defense mechanisms. To evaluate the performance of CGI, we conduct experiments on various benchmark datasets, considering representative Byzantine-robust AGRs, and exploring diverse FL settings with different levels of adversary knowledge about the data. Our results demonstrate that CGI consistently and successfully extracts training input in all tested scenarios.

Do humans and machines have the same eyes? Human-machine perceptual differences on image classification

Trained computer vision models are assumed to solve vision tasks by imitating human behavior learned from training labels. Most efforts in recent vision research focus on measuring the model task performance using standardized benchmarks. Limited work has been done to understand the perceptual difference between humans and machines. To fill this gap, our study first quantifies and analyzes the statistical distributions of mistakes from the two sources. We then explore human vs. machine expertise after ranking tasks by difficulty levels. Even when humans and machines have similar overall accuracies, the distribution of answers may vary. Leveraging the perceptual difference between humans and machines, we empirically demonstrate a post-hoc human-machine collaboration that outperforms humans or machines alone.

Fairness Improves Learning from Noisily Labeled Long-Tailed Data

Both long-tailed and noisily labeled data frequently appear in real-world applications and impose significant challenges for learning. Most prior works treat either problem in an isolated way and do not explicitly consider the coupling effects of the two. Our empirical observation reveals that such solutions fail to consistently improve the learning when the dataset is long-tailed with label noise. Moreover, with the presence of label noise, existing methods do not observe universal improvements across different sub-populations; in other words, some sub-populations enjoyed the benefits of improved accuracy at the cost of hurting others. Based on these observations, we introduce the Fairness Regularizer (FR), inspired by regularizing the performance gap between any two sub-populations. We show that the introduced fairness regularizer improves the performances of sub-populations on the tail and the overall learning performance. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed solution when complemented with certain existing popular robust or class-balanced methods.

To Aggregate or Not? Learning with Separate Noisy Labels

The rawly collected training data often comes with separate noisy labels collected from multiple imperfect annotators (e.g., via crowdsourcing). Typically one would first aggregate the separate noisy labels into one and apply standard training methods. The literature has also studied extensively on effective aggregation approaches. This paper revisits this choice and aims to provide an answer to the question of whether one should aggregate separate noisy labels into single ones or use them separately as given. We theoretically analyze the performance of both approaches under the empirical risk minimization framework for a number of popular loss functions, including the ones designed specifically for the problem of learning with noisy labels. Our theorems conclude that label separation is preferred over label aggregation when the noise rates are high, or the number of labelers/annotations is insufficient. Extensive empirical results validate our conclusion.

Learning with Noisy Labels Revisited: A Study Using Real-World Human Annotations

Existing research on learning with noisy labels mainly focuses on synthetic label noise. Synthetic label noise, though has clean structures which greatly enable statistical analyses, often fails to model the real-world noise patterns. The recent literature has observed several efforts to offer real-world noisy datasets, yet the existing efforts suffer from two caveats: firstly, the lack of ground-truth verification makes it hard to theoretically study the property and treatment of real-world label noise. Secondly, these efforts are often of large scales, which may lead to unfair comparisons of robust methods within reasonable and accessible computation power. To better understand real-world label noise, it is important to establish controllable and moderate-sized real-world noisy datasets with both ground-truth and noisy labels. This work presents two new benchmark datasets (CIFAR-10N, CIFAR-100N), equipping the train dataset of CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 with human-annotated real-world noisy labels that we collect from Amazon Mechanical Turk. We quantitatively and qualitatively show that real-world noisy labels follow an instance-dependent pattern rather than the classically adopted class-dependent ones. We then initiate an effort to benchmark a subset of existing solutions using CIFAR-10N, CIFAR-100N. We next proceed to study the memorization of model predictions, which further illustrates the difference between human noise and class-dependent synthetic noise. We show indeed the real-world noise patterns impose new and outstanding challenges as compared to synthetic ones. These observations require us to rethink the treatment of noisy labels, and we hope the availability of these two datasets would facilitate the development and evaluation of future learning with noisy label solutions. The corresponding datasets and the leaderboard are publicly available at \url{http://noisylabels.com}.

Induced Domain Adaptation

We formulate the problem of induced domain adaptation (IDA) when the underlying distribution/domain shift is introduced by the model being deployed. Our formulation is motivated by applications where the deployed machine learning models interact with human agents, and will ultimately face responsive and interactive data distributions. We formalize the discussions of the transferability of learning in our IDA setting by studying how the model trained on the available source distribution (data) would translate to the performance on the induced domain. We provide both upper bounds for the performance gap due to the induced domain shift, as well as lower bound for the trade-offs a classifier has to suffer on either the source training distribution or the induced target distribution. We provide further instantiated analysis for two popular domain adaptation settings with covariate shift and label shift. We highlight some key properties of IDA, as well as computational and learning challenges.

Understanding (Generalized) Label Smoothing when Learning with Noisy Labels

Label smoothing (LS) is an arising learning paradigm that uses the positively weighted average of both the hard training labels and uniformly distributed soft labels. It was shown that LS serves as a regularizer for training data with hard labels and therefore improves the generalization of the model. Later it was reported LS even helps with improving robustness when learning with noisy labels. However, we observe that the advantage of LS vanishes when we operate in a high label noise regime. Puzzled by the observation, we proceeded to discover that several proposed learning-with-noisy-labels solutions in the literature instead relate more closely to negative label smoothing (NLS), which defines as using a negative weight to combine the hard and soft labels! We show that NLS functions substantially differently from LS in their achieved model confidence. To differentiate the two cases, we will call LS the positive label smoothing (PLS), and this paper unifies PLS and NLS into generalized label smoothing (GLS). We provide understandings for the properties of GLS when learning with noisy labels. Among other established properties, we theoretically show NLS is considered more beneficial when the label noise rates are high. We provide experimental results to support our findings too.