Personalisation within bounds: A risk taxonomy and policy framework for the alignment of large language models with personalised feedback

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.05453v1
• Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 17:52:07 GMT
• Title: Personalisation within bounds: A risk taxonomy and policy framework for the alignment of large language models with personalised feedback
• Authors: Hannah Rose Kirk, Bertie Vidgen, Paul R\"ottger, Scott A. Hale
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are used to generate content for a wide range of tasks, and are set to reach a growing audience in coming years. This intensifies the need to ensure that models are aligned with human preferences and do not produce unsafe, inaccurate or toxic outputs. Personalising LLMs through micro-level preference learning processes may result in models that are better aligned with each user.
• Score: 11.895749982167375
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are used to generate content for a wide range of tasks, and are set to reach a growing audience in coming years due to integration in product interfaces like ChatGPT or search engines like Bing. This intensifies the need to ensure that models are aligned with human preferences and do not produce unsafe, inaccurate or toxic outputs. While alignment techniques like reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) and red-teaming can mitigate some safety concerns and improve model capabilities, it is unlikely that an aggregate fine-tuning process can adequately represent the full range of users' preferences and values. Different people may legitimately disagree on their preferences for language and conversational norms, as well as on values or ideologies which guide their communication. Personalising LLMs through micro-level preference learning processes may result in models that are better aligned with each user. However, there are several normative challenges in defining the bounds of a societally-acceptable and safe degree of personalisation. In this paper, we ask how, and in what ways, LLMs should be personalised. First, we review literature on current paradigms for aligning LLMs with human feedback, and identify issues including (i) a lack of clarity regarding what alignment means; (ii) a tendency of technology providers to prescribe definitions of inherently subjective preferences and values; and (iii) a 'tyranny of the crowdworker', exacerbated by a lack of documentation in who we are really aligning to. Second, we present a taxonomy of benefits and risks associated with personalised LLMs, for individuals and society at large. Finally, we propose a three-tiered policy framework that allows users to experience the benefits of personalised alignment, while restraining unsafe and undesirable LLM-behaviours within (supra-)national and organisational bounds.

Related papers

• Exploring Safety-Utility Trade-Offs in Personalized Language Models [26.792174008353008]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) suffer from personalization bias, where their performance is impacted when they are personalized to a user's identity. We quantify personalization bias by evaluating the performance of LLMs along two axes - safety and utility. We discuss several strategies to mitigate personalization bias using preference tuning and prompt-based defenses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T00:17:11Z)
• Beyond Human Norms: Unveiling Unique Values of Large Language Models through Interdisciplinary Approaches [69.73783026870998]
  This work proposes a novel framework, ValueLex, to reconstruct Large Language Models' unique value system from scratch. Based on Lexical Hypothesis, ValueLex introduces a generative approach to elicit diverse values from 30+ LLMs. We identify three core value dimensions, Competence, Character, and Integrity, each with specific subdimensions, revealing that LLMs possess a structured, albeit non-human, value system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T09:44:51Z)
• Unveiling the Misuse Potential of Base Large Language Models via In-Context Learning [61.2224355547598]
  Open-sourcing of large language models (LLMs) accelerates application development, innovation, and scientific progress. Our investigation exposes a critical oversight in this belief. By deploying carefully designed demonstrations, our research demonstrates that base LLMs could effectively interpret and execute malicious instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T13:22:54Z)
• ALERT: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Safety through Red Teaming [64.86326523181553]
  ALERT is a large-scale benchmark to assess safety based on a novel fine-grained risk taxonomy. It aims to identify vulnerabilities, inform improvements, and enhance the overall safety of the language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-06T15:01:47Z)
• DeAL: Decoding-time Alignment for Large Language Models [59.63643988872571]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are nowadays expected to generate content aligned with human preferences. We propose DeAL, a framework that allows the user to customize reward functions and enables Detime Alignment of LLMs. Our experiments show that we can DeAL with fine-grained trade-offs, improve adherence to alignment objectives, and address residual gaps in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T06:12:29Z)
• Fortifying Ethical Boundaries in AI: Advanced Strategies for Enhancing Security in Large Language Models [3.9490749767170636]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized text generation, translation, and question-answering tasks. Despite their widespread use, LLMs present challenges such as ethical dilemmas when models are compelled to respond inappropriately. This paper addresses these challenges by introducing a multi-pronged approach that includes: 1) filtering sensitive vocabulary from user input to prevent unethical responses; 2) detecting role-playing to halt interactions that could lead to 'prison break' scenarios; and 4) extending these methodologies to various LLM derivatives like Multi-Model Large Language Models (MLLMs)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-27T08:09:33Z)
• Personalized Soups: Personalized Large Language Model Alignment via Post-hoc Parameter Merging [148.77027765872006]
  We study Reinforcement Learning from Personalized Human Feedback (RLPHF) problem. LLMs are aligned to multiple preferences by modeling alignment as a Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning (MORL) problem. We show that we can achieve personalized alignment by decomposing preferences into multiple dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T20:22:13Z)
• Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.