RLAIF-V: Open-Source AI Feedback Leads to Super GPT-4V Trustworthiness

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.17220v2
• Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2024 07:31:22 GMT
• Title: RLAIF-V: Open-Source AI Feedback Leads to Super GPT-4V Trustworthiness
• Authors: Tianyu Yu, Haoye Zhang, Qiming Li, Qixin Xu, Yuan Yao, Da Chen, Xiaoman Lu, Ganqu Cui, Yunkai Dang, Taiwen He, Xiaocheng Feng, Jun Song, Bo Zheng, Zhiyuan Liu, Tat-Seng Chua, Maosong Sun,
• Abstract summary: We introduce RLAIF-V, a novel framework that aligns MLLMs in a fully open-source paradigm.<n> RLAIF-V maximally explores open-source MLLMs from two perspectives, including high-quality feedback data generation.<n>Experiments on six benchmarks in both automatic and human evaluation show that RLAIF-V substantially enhances the trustworthiness of models.
• Score: 102.06442250444618
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Traditional feedback learning for hallucination reduction relies on labor-intensive manual labeling or expensive proprietary models. This leaves the community without foundational knowledge about how to build high-quality feedback with open-source MLLMs. In this work, we introduce RLAIF-V, a novel framework that aligns MLLMs in a fully open-source paradigm. RLAIF-V maximally explores open-source MLLMs from two perspectives, including high-quality feedback data generation for preference learning and self-feedback guidance for inference-time scaling. Extensive experiments on six benchmarks in both automatic and human evaluation show that RLAIF-V substantially enhances the trustworthiness of models at both preference learning and inference time. RLAIF-V 7B reduces object hallucination by 80.7\% and overall hallucination by 33.7\%. Remarkably, RLAIF-V 12B further reveals the self-alignment potential of open-source MLLMs, where the model can learn from feedback of itself to achieve super GPT-4V trustworthiness.

Related papers

• EACO: Enhancing Alignment in Multimodal LLMs via Critical Observation [58.546205554954454]
  We propose Enhancing Alignment in MLLMs via Critical Observation (EACO) EACO aligns MLLMs by self-generated preference data using only 5k images economically. EACO reduces the overall hallucinations by 65.6% on HallusionBench and improves the reasoning ability by 21.8% on MME-Cognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-06T09:59:47Z)
• VLRewardBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Vision-Language Generative Reward Models [66.56298924208319]
  Vision-language generative reward models (VL-GenRMs) play a crucial role in aligning and evaluating multimodal AI systems. Current assessment methods rely on AI-annotated preference labels from traditional tasks. We introduce VL-RewardBench, a benchmark spanning general multimodal queries, visual hallucination detection, and complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-26T14:08:34Z)
• Automatic Evaluation for Text-to-image Generation: Task-decomposed Framework, Distilled Training, and Meta-evaluation Benchmark [62.58869921806019]
  We propose a task decomposition evaluation framework based on GPT-4o to automatically construct a new training dataset. We design innovative training strategies to effectively distill GPT-4o's evaluation capabilities into a 7B open-source MLLM, MiniCPM-V-2.6. Experimental results demonstrate that our distilled open-source MLLM significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art GPT-4o-base baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T08:06:06Z)
• Open Source Language Models Can Provide Feedback: Evaluating LLMs' Ability to Help Students Using GPT-4-As-A-Judge [4.981275578987307]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown great potential for the automatic generation of feedback in a wide range of computing contexts. However, concerns have been voiced around the privacy and ethical implications of sending student work to proprietary models. This has sparked considerable interest in the use of open source LLMs in education, but the quality of the feedback that such open models can produce remains understudied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-08T17:57:39Z)
• How Easy is It to Fool Your Multimodal LLMs? An Empirical Analysis on Deceptive Prompts [54.07541591018305]
  We present MAD-Bench, a benchmark that contains 1000 test samples divided into 5 categories, such as non-existent objects, count of objects, and spatial relationship. We provide a comprehensive analysis of popular MLLMs, ranging from GPT-4v, Reka, Gemini-Pro, to open-sourced models, such as LLaVA-NeXT and MiniCPM-Llama3. While GPT-4o achieves 82.82% accuracy on MAD-Bench, the accuracy of any other model in our experiments ranges from 9% to 50%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T18:31:27Z)
• A Critical Evaluation of AI Feedback for Aligning Large Language Models [60.42291111149438]
  We show that simple supervised fine-tuning with GPT-4 as the teacher outperforms existing RLAIF pipelines. More generally, we find that the gains from RLAIF vary substantially across base model families, test-time evaluation protocols, and critic models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T18:53:54Z)
• Aligner: Efficient Alignment by Learning to Correct [10.056049435141645]
  We introduce Aligner, a model-agnostic, plug-and-play module that learns the correctional residuals between preferred and dispreferred answers. It can be applied to various open-source and API-based models with only one-off training, making it suitable for rapid iteration. Our experiments demonstrate performance improvements by deploying the same Aligner model across 11 different language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-04T09:24:51Z)
• Silkie: Preference Distillation for Large Visual Language Models [56.10697821410489]
  This paper explores preference distillation for large vision language models (LVLMs) We first build a vision-language feedback dataset utilizing AI annotation. We adopt GPT-4V to assess the generated outputs regarding helpfulness, visual faithfulness, and ethical considerations. The resulting model Silkie, achieves 6.9% and 9.5% relative improvement on the MME benchmark regarding the perception and cognition capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-17T09:44:27Z)
• RLHF-V: Towards Trustworthy MLLMs via Behavior Alignment from Fine-grained Correctional Human Feedback [103.08766858584049]
  We present RLHF-V, which enhances MLLM trustworthiness via behavior alignment from fine-grained correctional human feedback. Experiments on five benchmarks in both automatic and human evaluation show that, RLHF-V can enable substantially more trustworthy MLLM behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-01T11:36:08Z)
• Split and Merge: Aligning Position Biases in Large Language Model based Evaluators [23.38206418382832]
  PORTIA is an alignment-based system designed to mimic human comparison strategies to calibrate position bias. Our results show that PORTIA markedly enhances the consistency rates for all the models and comparison forms tested. It rectifies around 80% of the position bias instances within the GPT-4 model, elevating its consistency rate up to 98%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T14:38:58Z)
• Aligning Large Multimodal Models with Factually Augmented RLHF [176.54751941088819]
  Large Multimodal Models (LMM) are built across modalities and misalignment between two modalities can result in "hallucination" We adapt the Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) from the text domain to the task of vision-language alignment. We propose a new alignment algorithm called Factually Augmented RLHF that augments the reward model with additional factual information. Our approach achieves remarkable improvement on the LLaVA-Bench dataset with the 94% performance level of the text-only GPT-4.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-25T20:59:33Z)
• Towards Reliable and Fluent Large Language Models: Incorporating Feedback Learning Loops in QA Systems [10.58737969057445]
  We build a dataset to train a critic model capable of evaluating the citation, correctness, and fluency of responses generated by large language models. We propose an automated feedback mechanism that leverages the critic model to offer real-time feedback on heterogeneous aspects of generated text. Experimental results demonstrate the efficacy of our approach, including a 4% precision increase in citation and an approximately 8% enhancement in the MAUVE metric for fluency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-08T09:39:53Z)

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.