Alignment for Honesty

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.07000v1
• Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 06:10:42 GMT
• Title: Alignment for Honesty
• Authors: Yuqing Yang, Ethan Chern, Xipeng Qiu, Graham Neubig, Pengfei Liu
• Abstract summary: We argue for the importance of alignment for honesty, ensuring that language models proactively refuse to answer questions when they lack knowledge. This challenge demands comprehensive solutions in terms of metric development, benchmark creation, and training. We introduce a flexible training framework which is further instantiated by several efficient fine-tuning techniques that emphasize honesty.
• Score: 113.42626737461129
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Recent research has made significant strides in applying alignment techniques to enhance the helpfulness and harmlessness of large language models (LLMs) in accordance with human intentions. In this paper, we argue for the importance of alignment for honesty, ensuring that LLMs proactively refuse to answer questions when they lack knowledge, while still not being overly conservative. However, a pivotal aspect of alignment for honesty involves discerning the limits of an LLM's knowledge, which is far from straightforward. This challenge demands comprehensive solutions in terms of metric development, benchmark creation, and training methodologies. In this paper, we address these challenges by first establishing a precise problem definition and defining ``honesty'' inspired by the Analects of Confucius. This serves as a cornerstone for developing metrics that effectively measure an LLM's honesty by quantifying its progress post-alignment. Furthermore, we introduce a flexible training framework which is further instantiated by several efficient fine-tuning techniques that emphasize honesty without sacrificing performance on other tasks. Our extensive experiments reveal that these aligned models show a marked increase in honesty, as indicated by our proposed metrics. We open-source a wealth of resources to facilitate future research at https://github.com/GAIR-NLP/alignment-for-honesty, including honesty-aligned models, training and evaluation datasets for honesty alignment, concept glossary, as well as all relevant source code.

Related papers

• Alignment and Safety in Large Language Models: Safety Mechanisms, Training Paradigms, and Emerging Challenges [47.14342587731284]
  This survey provides a comprehensive overview of alignment techniques, training protocols, and empirical findings in large language models (LLMs) alignment.<n>We analyze the development of alignment methods across diverse paradigms, characterizing the fundamental trade-offs between core alignment objectives.<n>We discuss state-of-the-art techniques, including Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), Constitutional AI, brain-inspired methods, and alignment uncertainty quantification (AUQ)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T20:52:58Z)
• Adversarial Alignment for LLMs Requires Simpler, Reproducible, and More Measurable Objectives [52.863024096759816]
  Misaligned research objectives have hindered progress in adversarial robustness research over the past decade. We argue that realigned objectives are necessary for meaningful progress in adversarial alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T15:28:40Z)
• Aligning Large Language Models for Faithful Integrity Against Opposing Argument [71.33552795870544]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in complex reasoning tasks. They can be easily misled by unfaithful arguments during conversations, even when their original statements are correct. We propose a novel framework, named Alignment for Faithful Integrity with Confidence Estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-02T16:38:21Z)
• KaLM: Knowledge-aligned Autoregressive Language Modeling via Dual-view Knowledge Graph Contrastive Learning [74.21524111840652]
  This paper proposes textbfKaLM, a textitKnowledge-aligned Language Modeling approach. It fine-tunes autoregressive large language models to align with KG knowledge via the joint objective of explicit knowledge alignment and implicit knowledge alignment. Notably, our method achieves a significant performance boost in evaluations of knowledge-driven tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-06T11:08:24Z)
• FactAlign: Long-form Factuality Alignment of Large Language Models [35.067998820937284]
  Large language models have demonstrated significant potential as the next-generation information access engines. We propose FactAlign, a novel alignment framework designed to enhance the factuality of long-form responses. Our experiments on open-domain prompts and information-seeking questions demonstrate that FactAlign significantly improves the factual accuracy of LLM responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T16:03:13Z)
• A Survey on the Honesty of Large Language Models [115.8458596738659]
  Honesty is a fundamental principle for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values. Despite promising, current LLMs still exhibit significant dishonest behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-27T14:34:54Z)
• BeHonest: Benchmarking Honesty in Large Language Models [23.192389530727713]
  We introduce BeHonest, a pioneering benchmark specifically designed to assess honesty in Large Language Models. BeHonest evaluates three essential aspects of honesty: awareness of knowledge boundaries, avoidance of deceit, and consistency in responses. Our findings indicate that there is still significant room for improvement in the honesty of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-19T06:46:59Z)
• CLAMBER: A Benchmark of Identifying and Clarifying Ambiguous Information Needs in Large Language Models [60.59638232596912]
  We introduce CLAMBER, a benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) Building upon the taxonomy, we construct 12K high-quality data to assess the strengths, weaknesses, and potential risks of various off-the-shelf LLMs. Our findings indicate the limited practical utility of current LLMs in identifying and clarifying ambiguous user queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-20T14:34:01Z)
• Is Factuality Enhancement a Free Lunch For LLMs? Better Factuality Can Lead to Worse Context-Faithfulness [39.74642729786543]
  We argue that current factuality enhancement methods can significantly undermine context-faithfulness of large language models (LLMs) Experiments reveal that while these methods may yield inconsistent improvements in factual accuracy, they also cause a more severe decline in context-faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-30T02:08:28Z)
• SaGE: Evaluating Moral Consistency in Large Language Models [15.079905222871071]
  We show that even state-of-the-art Large Language Models are morally inconsistent in their generations. We propose an information-theoretic measure called Semantic Graph Entropy (SaGE) to measure a model's moral consistency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T11:23:21Z)
• Best Practices for Text Annotation with Large Language Models [11.421942894219901]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have ushered in a new era of text annotation. This paper proposes a comprehensive set of standards and best practices for their reliable, reproducible, and ethical use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T15:43:50Z)
• Fake Alignment: Are LLMs Really Aligned Well? [91.26543768665778]
  This study investigates the substantial discrepancy in performance between multiple-choice questions and open-ended questions. Inspired by research on jailbreak attack patterns, we argue this is caused by mismatched generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-10T08:01:23Z)
• Towards Verifiable Generation: A Benchmark for Knowledge-aware Language Model Attribution [48.86322922826514]
  This paper defines a new task of Knowledge-aware Language Model Attribution (KaLMA) First, we extend attribution source from unstructured texts to Knowledge Graph (KG), whose rich structures benefit both the attribution performance and working scenarios. Second, we propose a new Conscious Incompetence" setting considering the incomplete knowledge repository. Third, we propose a comprehensive automatic evaluation metric encompassing text quality, citation quality, and text citation alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T11:45:59Z)
• Context-faithful Prompting for Large Language Models [51.194410884263135]
  Large language models (LLMs) encode parametric knowledge about world facts. Their reliance on parametric knowledge may cause them to overlook contextual cues, leading to incorrect predictions in context-sensitive NLP tasks. We assess and enhance LLMs' contextual faithfulness in two aspects: knowledge conflict and prediction with abstention.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T17:54:58Z)

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.