Insights from the Inverse: Reconstructing LLM Training Goals Through Inverse RL

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12491v1
• Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 12:14:25 GMT
• Title: Insights from the Inverse: Reconstructing LLM Training Goals Through Inverse RL
• Authors: Jared Joselowitz, Arjun Jagota, Satyapriya Krishna, Sonali Parbhoo,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) trained with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback have demonstrated remarkable capabilities, but their underlying reward functions and decision-making processes remain opaque. This paper introduces a novel approach to interpreting LLMs by applying inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) to recover their implicit reward functions. We conduct experiments on toxicity-aligned LLMs of varying sizes, extracting reward models that achieve up to 80.40% accuracy in predicting human preferences.
• Score: 7.988692259455583
• License:
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) trained with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities, but their underlying reward functions and decision-making processes remain opaque. This paper introduces a novel approach to interpreting LLMs by applying inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) to recover their implicit reward functions. We conduct experiments on toxicity-aligned LLMs of varying sizes, extracting reward models that achieve up to 80.40% accuracy in predicting human preferences. Our analysis reveals key insights into the non-identifiability of reward functions, the relationship between model size and interpretability, and potential pitfalls in the RLHF process. We demonstrate that IRL-derived reward models can be used to fine-tune new LLMs, resulting in comparable or improved performance on toxicity benchmarks. This work provides a new lens for understanding and improving LLM alignment, with implications for the responsible development and deployment of these powerful systems.

Related papers

• Reinforcement Learning for Aligning Large Language Models Agents with Interactive Environments: Quantifying and Mitigating Prompt Overfitting [40.78026627009521]
  Reinforcement learning (RL) is a promising approach for aligning large language models (LLMs) knowledge with sequential decision-making tasks. We propose a novel framework to analyze the sensitivity of LLMs to prompt formulations following RL training in a textual environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T18:25:35Z)
• CoMMIT: Coordinated Instruction Tuning for Multimodal Large Language Models [68.64605538559312]
  In this paper, we analyze the MLLM instruction tuning from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. Inspired by our findings, we propose a measurement to quantitatively evaluate the learning balance. In addition, we introduce an auxiliary loss regularization method to promote updating of the generation distribution of MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T23:18:55Z)
• Q*: Improving Multi-step Reasoning for LLMs with Deliberative Planning [53.6472920229013]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capability in many natural language tasks. LLMs are prone to produce errors, hallucinations and inconsistent statements when performing multi-step reasoning. We introduce Q*, a framework for guiding LLMs decoding process with deliberative planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T13:08:09Z)
• Extracting Heuristics from Large Language Models for Reward Shaping in Reinforcement Learning [28.077228879886402]
  Reinforcement Learning (RL) suffers from sample inefficiency in reward domains, and the problem is further pronounced in case of transitions. To improve the sample efficiency, reward shaping is a well-studied approach to introduce intrinsic rewards that can help the RL agent converge to an optimal policy faster.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T03:53:57Z)
• RLHF Deciphered: A Critical Analysis of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback for LLMs [49.386699863989335]
  Training large language models (LLMs) to serve as effective assistants for humans requires careful consideration. A promising approach is reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), which leverages human feedback to update the model in accordance with human preferences. In this paper, we analyze RLHF through the lens of reinforcement learning principles to develop an understanding of its fundamentals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-12T15:54:15Z)
• Comprehensive Reassessment of Large-Scale Evaluation Outcomes in LLMs: A Multifaceted Statistical Approach [64.42462708687921]
  Evaluations have revealed that factors such as scaling, training types, architectures and other factors profoundly impact the performance of LLMs. Our study embarks on a thorough re-examination of these LLMs, targeting the inadequacies in current evaluation methods. This includes the application of ANOVA, Tukey HSD tests, GAMM, and clustering technique.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-22T14:47:35Z)
• Reinforcement Learning from Reflective Feedback (RLRF): Aligning and Improving LLMs via Fine-Grained Self-Reflection [24.435121488662897]
  We propose a novel framework: Reinforcement Learning from Reflective Feedback (RLRF) RLRF employs a self-reflection mechanism to systematically explore and refine LLM responses, then fine-tuning the models via a RL algorithm along with promising responses. Our experiments across Just-Eval, Factuality, and Mathematical Reasoning demonstrate the efficacy and transformative potential of RLRF.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T08:57:27Z)
• Towards Modeling Learner Performance with Large Language Models [7.002923425715133]
  This paper investigates whether the pattern recognition and sequence modeling capabilities of LLMs can be extended to the domain of knowledge tracing. We compare two approaches to using LLMs for this task, zero-shot prompting and model fine-tuning, with existing, non-LLM approaches to knowledge tracing. While LLM-based approaches do not achieve state-of-the-art performance, fine-tuned LLMs surpass the performance of naive baseline models and perform on par with standard Bayesian Knowledge Tracing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T14:06:34Z)
• Characterizing Truthfulness in Large Language Model Generations with Local Intrinsic Dimension [63.330262740414646]
  We study how to characterize and predict the truthfulness of texts generated from large language models (LLMs) We suggest investigating internal activations and quantifying LLM's truthfulness using the local intrinsic dimension (LID) of model activations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-28T04:56:21Z)
• Reinforcement Learning from LLM Feedback to Counteract Goal Misgeneralization [0.0]
  We introduce a method to address goal misgeneralization in reinforcement learning (RL) Goal misgeneralization occurs when an agent retains its capabilities out-of-distribution yet pursues a proxy rather than the intended one. This study demonstrates how the Large Language Model can efficiently supervise RL agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-14T01:09:48Z)
• On Learning to Summarize with Large Language Models as References [101.79795027550959]
  Large language models (LLMs) are favored by human annotators over the original reference summaries in commonly used summarization datasets. We study an LLM-as-reference learning setting for smaller text summarization models to investigate whether their performance can be substantially improved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T16:56:04Z)

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.