Mitigating Unsafe Feedback with Learning Constraints

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.12914v2
• Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2024 00:03:38 GMT
• Title: Mitigating Unsafe Feedback with Learning Constraints
• Authors: Domenic Rosati, Giles Edkins, Harsh Raj, David Atanasov, Subhabrata Majumdar, Janarthanan Rajendran, Frank Rudzicz, Hassan Sajjad,
• Abstract summary: We show that safety-aligned Large Language Models can explore unsafe action spaces through generating harmful text. We adapt a number of both "implict" and "explicit" harmful fine-tuning defences to evaluate whether they are effective as learning constraints.
• Score: 26.872318173182414
• License:
• Abstract: While there has been progress towards aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human values and ensuring safe behaviour at inference time, safety-guards can easily be removed when fine-tuned on unsafe and harmful datasets.While this setting has been treated extensively, another popular training paradigm, learning from unsafe feedback with reinforcement learning, has previously been unexplored. This is concerning due to the widespread deployment of feedback collection systems. We address this gap by providing an analysis of learning settings where feedback is adversarial and noisy, i.e. that unsafe samples are preferred over safe ones despite model developers goal to maintain safety. We find that safety-aligned LLMs easily explore unsafe action spaces through generating harmful text and optimize for adversarial reward indicating that current safety guards are not enough to prevent learning from unsafe feedback. In order to protect against this vulnerability, we adapt a number of both "implict" and "explicit" harmful fine-tuning defences to evaluate whether they are effective as learning constraints in an RL setting finding that no method is generally effective pointing to the need for more research in defences given the widespread adoption of methods designed to learn from feedback. We end the paper with the observation that some defences work by performing "harmless reward hacking" for which we provide a theoretical explanation drawn from the theory of Constrained Markov Decision Processes and provide some direction for future defence development.

Related papers

• Vulnerability Mitigation for Safety-Aligned Language Models via Debiasing [12.986006070964772]
  Safety alignment is an essential research topic for real-world AI applications. Our study first identified the difficulty of eliminating such vulnerabilities without sacrificing the model's helpfulness. Our method could enhance the model's helpfulness while maintaining safety, thus improving the trade-off-front.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T09:31:54Z)
• SCANS: Mitigating the Exaggerated Safety for LLMs via Safety-Conscious Activation Steering [56.92068213969036]
  Safety alignment is indispensable for Large Language Models (LLMs) to defend threats from malicious instructions. Recent researches reveal safety-aligned LLMs prone to reject benign queries due to the exaggerated safety issue. We propose a Safety-Conscious Activation Steering (SCANS) method to mitigate the exaggerated safety concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T10:01:34Z)
• Refuse Whenever You Feel Unsafe: Improving Safety in LLMs via Decoupled Refusal Training [67.30423823744506]
  This study addresses a critical gap in safety tuning practices for Large Language Models (LLMs) We introduce a novel approach, Decoupled Refusal Training (DeRTa), designed to empower LLMs to refuse compliance to harmful prompts at any response position. DeRTa incorporates two novel components: (1) Maximum Likelihood Estimation with Harmful Response Prefix, which trains models to recognize and avoid unsafe content by appending a segment of harmful response to the beginning of a safe response, and (2) Reinforced Transition Optimization (RTO), which equips models with the ability to transition from potential harm to safety refusal consistently throughout the harmful
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T09:36:33Z)
• Breach By A Thousand Leaks: Unsafe Information Leakage in `Safe' AI Responses [42.136793654338106]
  We introduce a new safety evaluation framework based on impermissible information leakage of model outputs. We show that to ensure safety against inferential adversaries, defense mechanisms must ensure information censorship.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T16:19:25Z)
• From Representational Harms to Quality-of-Service Harms: A Case Study on Llama 2 Safety Safeguards [4.0645651835677565]
  We investigate the effectiveness of safety measures by evaluating models on already mitigated biases. We create a set of non-toxic prompts, which we then use to evaluate Llama models. We observe that the safety/helpfulness trade-offs are more pronounced for certain demographic groups which can lead to quality-of-service harms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-20T00:22:38Z)
• The Art of Defending: A Systematic Evaluation and Analysis of LLM Defense Strategies on Safety and Over-Defensiveness [56.174255970895466]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) play an increasingly pivotal role in natural language processing applications. This paper presents Safety and Over-Defensiveness Evaluation (SODE) benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-30T17:37:06Z)
• Approximate Shielding of Atari Agents for Safe Exploration [83.55437924143615]
  We propose a principled algorithm for safe exploration based on the concept of shielding. We present preliminary results that show our approximate shielding algorithm effectively reduces the rate of safety violations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-21T16:19:54Z)
• Provable Safe Reinforcement Learning with Binary Feedback [62.257383728544006]
  We consider the problem of provable safe RL when given access to an offline oracle providing binary feedback on the safety of state, action pairs. We provide a novel meta algorithm, SABRE, which can be applied to any MDP setting given access to a blackbox PAC RL algorithm for that setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-26T05:37:51Z)
• Conservative Safety Critics for Exploration [120.73241848565449]
  We study the problem of safe exploration in reinforcement learning (RL) We learn a conservative safety estimate of environment states through a critic. We show that the proposed approach can achieve competitive task performance while incurring significantly lower catastrophic failure rates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-27T17:54:25Z)

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.