Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) gain substantial reasoning and decision-making capabilities from thought structures. However, existing methods such as Tree of Thought and Retrieval Augmented Thoughts often fall short in complex tasks due to the limitations of insufficient local retrieval of factual knowledge and inadequate global selection of strategies. These limitations make it challenging for these methods to balance factual accuracy and comprehensive logical optimization effectively. To address these limitations, we introduce the Retrieval Augmented Thought Tree (RATT), a novel thought structure that considers both overall logical soundness and factual correctness at each step of the thinking process. Specifically, at every point of a thought branch, RATT performs planning and lookahead to explore and evaluate multiple potential reasoning steps, and integrate the fact-checking ability of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with LLM's ability to assess overall strategy. Through this combination of factual knowledge and strategic feasibility, the RATT adjusts and integrates the thought tree structure to search for the most promising branches within the search space. This thought structure significantly enhances the model's coherence in logical inference and efficiency in decision-making, and thus increases the limit of the capacity of LLM to generate reliable inferences and decisions based on thought structures. A broad range of experiments on different types of tasks showcases that the RATT structure significantly outperforms existing methods in factual correctness and logical coherence.
Abstract:The reward model for Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has proven effective in fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs). Notably, collecting human feedback for RLHF can be resource-intensive and lead to scalability issues for LLMs and complex tasks. Our proposed framework Proto-RM leverages prototypical networks to enhance reward models under limited human feedback. By enabling stable and reliable structural learning from fewer samples, Proto-RM significantly enhances LLMs' adaptability and accuracy in interpreting human preferences. Extensive experiments on various datasets demonstrate that Proto-RM significantly improves the performance of reward models and LLMs in human feedback tasks, achieving comparable and usually better results than traditional methods, while requiring significantly less data. in data-limited scenarios. This research offers a promising direction for enhancing the efficiency of reward models and optimizing the fine-tuning of language models under restricted feedback conditions.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) gain substantial reasoning and decision-making capabilities from thought structures. However, existing methods such as Tree of Thought and Retrieval Augmented Thoughts often fall short in complex tasks due to the limitations of insufficient local retrieval of factual knowledge and inadequate global selection of strategies. These limitations make it challenging for these methods to balance factual accuracy and comprehensive logical optimization effectively. To address these limitations, we introduce the Retrieval Augmented Thought Tree (RATT), a novel thought structure that considers both overall logical soundness and factual correctness at each step of the thinking process. Specifically, at every point of a thought branch, RATT performs planning and lookahead to explore and evaluate multiple potential reasoning steps, and integrate the fact-checking ability of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) with LLM's ability to assess overall strategy. Through this combination of factual knowledge and strategic feasibility, the RATT adjusts and integrates the thought tree structure to search for the most promising branches within the search space. This thought structure significantly enhances the model's coherence in logical inference and efficiency in decision-making, and thus increases the limit of the capacity of LLM to generate reliable inferences and decisions based on thought structures. A broad range of experiments on different types of tasks showcases that the RATT structure significantly outperforms existing methods in factual correctness and logical coherence.
Abstract:Despite the surprisingly high intelligence exhibited by Large Language Models (LLMs), we are somehow intimidated to fully deploy them into real-life applications considering their black-box nature. Concept-based explanations arise as a promising avenue for explaining what the LLMs have learned, making them more transparent to humans. However, current evaluations for concepts tend to be heuristic and non-deterministic, e.g. case study or human evaluation, hindering the development of the field. To bridge the gap, we approach concept-based explanation evaluation via faithfulness and readability. We first introduce a formal definition of concept generalizable to diverse concept-based explanations. Based on this, we quantify faithfulness via the difference in the output upon perturbation. We then provide an automatic measure for readability, by measuring the coherence of patterns that maximally activate a concept. This measure serves as a cost-effective and reliable substitute for human evaluation. Finally, based on measurement theory, we describe a meta-evaluation method for evaluating the above measures via reliability and validity, which can be generalized to other tasks as well. Extensive experimental analysis has been conducted to validate and inform the selection of concept evaluation measures.
Abstract:Current open-source large language models (LLMs) are often undergone careful safety alignment before public release. Some attack methods have also been proposed that help check for safety vulnerabilities in LLMs to ensure alignment robustness. However, many of these methods have moderate attack success rates. Even when successful, the harmfulness of their outputs cannot be guaranteed, leading to suspicions that these methods have not accurately identified the safety vulnerabilities of LLMs. In this paper, we introduce a LLM attack method utilizing concept-based model explanation, where we extract safety concept activation vectors (SCAVs) from LLMs' activation space, enabling efficient attacks on well-aligned LLMs like LLaMA-2, achieving near 100% attack success rate as if LLMs are completely unaligned. This suggests that LLMs, even after thorough safety alignment, could still pose potential risks to society upon public release. To evaluate the harmfulness of outputs resulting with various attack methods, we propose a comprehensive evaluation method that reduces the potential inaccuracies of existing evaluations, and further validate that our method causes more harmful content. Additionally, we discover that the SCAVs show some transferability across different open-source LLMs.
Abstract:In reasoning tasks, even a minor error can cascade into inaccurate results, leading to suboptimal performance of large language models in such domains. Earlier fine-tuning approaches sought to mitigate this by leveraging more precise supervisory signals from human labeling, larger models, or self-sampling, although at a high cost. Conversely, we develop a method that avoids external resources, relying instead on introducing perturbations to the input. Our training approach randomly masks certain tokens within the chain of thought, a technique we found to be particularly effective for reasoning tasks. When applied to fine-tuning with GSM8K, this method achieved a 5% improvement in accuracy over standard supervised fine-tuning with a few codes modified and no additional labeling effort. Furthermore, it is complementary to existing methods. When integrated with related data augmentation methods, it leads to an average improvement of 3% improvement in GSM8K accuracy and 1% improvement in MATH accuracy across five datasets of various quality and size, as well as two base models. We further investigate the mechanisms behind this improvement through case studies and quantitative analysis, suggesting that our approach may provide superior support for the model in capturing long-distance dependencies, especially those related to questions. This enhancement could deepen understanding of premises in questions and prior steps. Our code is available at Github.
Abstract:The significant progress of large language models (LLMs) provides a promising opportunity to build human-like systems for various practical applications. However, when applied to specific task domains, an LLM pre-trained on a general-purpose corpus may exhibit a deficit or inadequacy in two types of domain-specific knowledge. One is a comprehensive set of domain data that is typically large-scale and continuously evolving. The other is specific working patterns of this domain reflected in the data. The absence or inadequacy of such knowledge impacts the performance of the LLM. In this paper, we propose a general paradigm that augments LLMs with DOmain-specific KnowledgE to enhance their performance on practical applications, namely DOKE. This paradigm relies on a domain knowledge extractor, working in three steps: 1) preparing effective knowledge for the task; 2) selecting the knowledge for each specific sample; and 3) expressing the knowledge in an LLM-understandable way. Then, the extracted knowledge is incorporated through prompts, without any computational cost of model fine-tuning. We instantiate the general paradigm on a widespread application, i.e. recommender systems, where critical item attributes and collaborative filtering signals are incorporated. Experimental results demonstrate that DOKE can substantially improve the performance of LLMs in specific domains.
Abstract:The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) has attracted much attention to value alignment for their responsible development. However, how to define values in this context remains a largely unexplored question. Existing work mainly follows the Helpful, Honest, Harmless principle and specifies values as risk criteria formulated in the AI community, e.g., fairness and privacy protection, suffering from poor clarity, adaptability and transparency. Inspired by basic values in humanity and social science across cultures, this work proposes a novel basic value alignment paradigm and introduces a value space spanned by basic value dimensions. All LLMs' behaviors can be mapped into the space by identifying the underlying values, possessing the potential to address the three challenges. To foster future research, we apply the representative Schwartz's Theory of Basic Values as an initialized example and construct FULCRA, a dataset consisting of 5k (LLM output, value vector) pairs. Our extensive analysis of FULCRA reveals the underlying relation between basic values and LLMs' behaviors, demonstrating that our approach not only covers existing mainstream risks but also anticipates possibly unidentified ones. Additionally, we present an initial implementation of the basic value evaluation and alignment, paving the way for future research in this line.
Abstract:Big models have greatly advanced AI's ability to understand, generate, and manipulate information and content, enabling numerous applications. However, as these models become increasingly integrated into everyday life, their inherent ethical values and potential biases pose unforeseen risks to society. This paper provides an overview of the risks and challenges associated with big models, surveys existing AI ethics guidelines, and examines the ethical implications arising from the limitations of these models. Taking a normative ethics perspective, we propose a reassessment of recent normative guidelines, highlighting the importance of collaborative efforts in academia to establish a unified and universal AI ethics framework. Furthermore, we investigate the moral inclinations of current mainstream LLMs using the Moral Foundation theory, analyze existing alignment algorithms, and outline the unique challenges encountered in aligning ethical values within them. To address these challenges, we introduce a novel conceptual paradigm for aligning the ethical values of big models and discuss promising research directions for alignment criteria, evaluation, and method, representing an initial step towards the interdisciplinary construction of the ethically aligned AI This paper is a modified English version of our Chinese paper https://crad.ict.ac.cn/cn/article/doi/10.7544/issn1000-1239.202330553, intended to help non-Chinese native speakers better understand our work.
Abstract:Artificial intelligence (AI) has witnessed an evolution from task-specific to general-purpose systems that trend toward human versatility. As AI systems begin to play pivotal roles in society, it is important to ensure that they are adequately evaluated. Current AI benchmarks typically assess performance on collections of specific tasks. This has drawbacks when used for assessing general-purpose AI systems. First, it is difficult to predict whether AI systems could complete a new task it has never seen or that did not previously exist. Second, these benchmarks often focus on overall performance metrics, potentially overlooking the finer details crucial for making informed decisions. Lastly, there are growing concerns about the reliability of existing benchmarks and questions about what is being measured. To solve these challenges, this paper suggests that psychometrics, the science of psychological measurement, should be placed at the core of evaluating general-purpose AI. Psychometrics provides a rigorous methodology for identifying and measuring the latent constructs that underlie performance across multiple tasks. We discuss its merits, warn against potential pitfalls, and propose a framework for putting it into practice. Finally, we explore future opportunities to integrate psychometrics with AI.