Showing 1–50 of 50 results for author: Leike, J

Unsupervised Elicitation of Language Models

Authors: Jiaxin Wen, Zachary Ankner, Arushi Somani, Peter Hase, Samuel Marks, Jacob Goldman-Wetzler, Linda Petrini, Henry Sleight, Collin Burns, He He, Shi Feng, Ethan Perez, Jan Leike

Abstract: To steer pretrained language models for downstream tasks, today's post-training paradigm relies on humans to specify desired behaviors. However, for models with superhuman capabilities, it is difficult or impossible to get high-quality human supervision. To address this challenge, we introduce a new unsupervised algorithm, Internal Coherence Maximization (ICM), to fine-tune pretrained language mod… ▽ More To steer pretrained language models for downstream tasks, today's post-training paradigm relies on humans to specify desired behaviors. However, for models with superhuman capabilities, it is difficult or impossible to get high-quality human supervision. To address this challenge, we introduce a new unsupervised algorithm, Internal Coherence Maximization (ICM), to fine-tune pretrained language models on their own generated labels, \emph{without external supervision}. On GSM8k-verification, TruthfulQA, and Alpaca reward modeling tasks, our method matches the performance of training on golden supervision and outperforms training on crowdsourced human supervision. On tasks where LMs' capabilities are strongly superhuman, our method can elicit those capabilities significantly better than training on human labels. Finally, we show that our method can improve the training of frontier LMs: we use our method to train an unsupervised reward model and use reinforcement learning to train a Claude 3.5 Haiku-based assistant. Both the reward model and the assistant outperform their human-supervised counterparts. △ Less

Submitted 11 June, 2025; originally announced June 2025.

Reasoning Models Don't Always Say What They Think

Authors: Yanda Chen, Joe Benton, Ansh Radhakrishnan, Jonathan Uesato, Carson Denison, John Schulman, Arushi Somani, Peter Hase, Misha Wagner, Fabien Roger, Vlad Mikulik, Samuel R. Bowman, Jan Leike, Jared Kaplan, Ethan Perez

Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) offers a potential boon for AI safety as it allows monitoring a model's CoT to try to understand its intentions and reasoning processes. However, the effectiveness of such monitoring hinges on CoTs faithfully representing models' actual reasoning processes. We evaluate CoT faithfulness of state-of-the-art reasoning models across 6 reasoning hints presented in the prompts and… ▽ More Chain-of-thought (CoT) offers a potential boon for AI safety as it allows monitoring a model's CoT to try to understand its intentions and reasoning processes. However, the effectiveness of such monitoring hinges on CoTs faithfully representing models' actual reasoning processes. We evaluate CoT faithfulness of state-of-the-art reasoning models across 6 reasoning hints presented in the prompts and find: (1) for most settings and models tested, CoTs reveal their usage of hints in at least 1% of examples where they use the hint, but the reveal rate is often below 20%, (2) outcome-based reinforcement learning initially improves faithfulness but plateaus without saturating, and (3) when reinforcement learning increases how frequently hints are used (reward hacking), the propensity to verbalize them does not increase, even without training against a CoT monitor. These results suggest that CoT monitoring is a promising way of noticing undesired behaviors during training and evaluations, but that it is not sufficient to rule them out. They also suggest that in settings like ours where CoT reasoning is not necessary, test-time monitoring of CoTs is unlikely to reliably catch rare and catastrophic unexpected behaviors. △ Less

Submitted 8 May, 2025; originally announced May 2025.

Auditing language models for hidden objectives

Authors: Samuel Marks, Johannes Treutlein, Trenton Bricken, Jack Lindsey, Jonathan Marcus, Siddharth Mishra-Sharma, Daniel Ziegler, Emmanuel Ameisen, Joshua Batson, Tim Belonax, Samuel R. Bowman, Shan Carter, Brian Chen, Hoagy Cunningham, Carson Denison, Florian Dietz, Satvik Golechha, Akbir Khan, Jan Kirchner, Jan Leike, Austin Meek, Kei Nishimura-Gasparian, Euan Ong, Christopher Olah, Adam Pearce , et al. (10 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: We study the feasibility of conducting alignment audits: investigations into whether models have undesired objectives. As a testbed, we train a language model with a hidden objective. Our training pipeline first teaches the model about exploitable errors in RLHF reward models (RMs), then trains the model to exploit some of these errors. We verify via out-of-distribution evaluations that the model… ▽ More We study the feasibility of conducting alignment audits: investigations into whether models have undesired objectives. As a testbed, we train a language model with a hidden objective. Our training pipeline first teaches the model about exploitable errors in RLHF reward models (RMs), then trains the model to exploit some of these errors. We verify via out-of-distribution evaluations that the model generalizes to exhibit whatever behaviors it believes RMs rate highly, including ones not reinforced during training. We leverage this model to study alignment audits in two ways. First, we conduct a blind auditing game where four teams, unaware of the model's hidden objective or training, investigate it for concerning behaviors and their causes. Three teams successfully uncovered the model's hidden objective using techniques including interpretability with sparse autoencoders (SAEs), behavioral attacks, and training data analysis. Second, we conduct an unblinded follow-up study of eight techniques for auditing the model, analyzing their strengths and limitations. Overall, our work provides a concrete example of using alignment audits to discover a model's hidden objective and proposes a methodology for practicing and validating progress in alignment auditing. △ Less

Submitted 27 March, 2025; v1 submitted 13 March, 2025; originally announced March 2025.

Forecasting Rare Language Model Behaviors

Authors: Erik Jones, Meg Tong, Jesse Mu, Mohammed Mahfoud, Jan Leike, Roger Grosse, Jared Kaplan, William Fithian, Ethan Perez, Mrinank Sharma

Abstract: Standard language model evaluations can fail to capture risks that emerge only at deployment scale. For example, a model may produce safe responses during a small-scale beta test, yet reveal dangerous information when processing billions of requests at deployment. To remedy this, we introduce a method to forecast potential risks across orders of magnitude more queries than we test during evaluatio… ▽ More Standard language model evaluations can fail to capture risks that emerge only at deployment scale. For example, a model may produce safe responses during a small-scale beta test, yet reveal dangerous information when processing billions of requests at deployment. To remedy this, we introduce a method to forecast potential risks across orders of magnitude more queries than we test during evaluation. We make forecasts by studying each query's elicitation probability -- the probability the query produces a target behavior -- and demonstrate that the largest observed elicitation probabilities predictably scale with the number of queries. We find that our forecasts can predict the emergence of diverse undesirable behaviors -- such as assisting users with dangerous chemical synthesis or taking power-seeking actions -- across up to three orders of magnitude of query volume. Our work enables model developers to proactively anticipate and patch rare failures before they manifest during large-scale deployments. △ Less

Submitted 23 February, 2025; originally announced February 2025.

Constitutional Classifiers: Defending against Universal Jailbreaks across Thousands of Hours of Red Teaming

Authors: Mrinank Sharma, Meg Tong, Jesse Mu, Jerry Wei, Jorrit Kruthoff, Scott Goodfriend, Euan Ong, Alwin Peng, Raj Agarwal, Cem Anil, Amanda Askell, Nathan Bailey, Joe Benton, Emma Bluemke, Samuel R. Bowman, Eric Christiansen, Hoagy Cunningham, Andy Dau, Anjali Gopal, Rob Gilson, Logan Graham, Logan Howard, Nimit Kalra, Taesung Lee, Kevin Lin , et al. (18 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to universal jailbreaks-prompting strategies that systematically bypass model safeguards and enable users to carry out harmful processes that require many model interactions, like manufacturing illegal substances at scale. To defend against these attacks, we introduce Constitutional Classifiers: safeguards trained on synthetic data, generated by promptin… ▽ More Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to universal jailbreaks-prompting strategies that systematically bypass model safeguards and enable users to carry out harmful processes that require many model interactions, like manufacturing illegal substances at scale. To defend against these attacks, we introduce Constitutional Classifiers: safeguards trained on synthetic data, generated by prompting LLMs with natural language rules (i.e., a constitution) specifying permitted and restricted content. In over 3,000 estimated hours of red teaming, no red teamer found a universal jailbreak that could extract information from an early classifier-guarded LLM at a similar level of detail to an unguarded model across most target queries. On automated evaluations, enhanced classifiers demonstrated robust defense against held-out domain-specific jailbreaks. These classifiers also maintain deployment viability, with an absolute 0.38% increase in production-traffic refusals and a 23.7% inference overhead. Our work demonstrates that defending against universal jailbreaks while maintaining practical deployment viability is tractable. △ Less

Submitted 30 January, 2025; originally announced January 2025.

GPT-4o System Card

Authors: OpenAI, :, Aaron Hurst, Adam Lerer, Adam P. Goucher, Adam Perelman, Aditya Ramesh, Aidan Clark, AJ Ostrow, Akila Welihinda, Alan Hayes, Alec Radford, Aleksander Mądry, Alex Baker-Whitcomb, Alex Beutel, Alex Borzunov, Alex Carney, Alex Chow, Alex Kirillov, Alex Nichol, Alex Paino, Alex Renzin, Alex Tachard Passos, Alexander Kirillov, Alexi Christakis , et al. (395 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: GPT-4o is an autoregressive omni model that accepts as input any combination of text, audio, image, and video, and generates any combination of text, audio, and image outputs. It's trained end-to-end across text, vision, and audio, meaning all inputs and outputs are processed by the same neural network. GPT-4o can respond to audio inputs in as little as 232 milliseconds, with an average of 320 mil… ▽ More GPT-4o is an autoregressive omni model that accepts as input any combination of text, audio, image, and video, and generates any combination of text, audio, and image outputs. It's trained end-to-end across text, vision, and audio, meaning all inputs and outputs are processed by the same neural network. GPT-4o can respond to audio inputs in as little as 232 milliseconds, with an average of 320 milliseconds, which is similar to human response time in conversation. It matches GPT-4 Turbo performance on text in English and code, with significant improvement on text in non-English languages, while also being much faster and 50\% cheaper in the API. GPT-4o is especially better at vision and audio understanding compared to existing models. In line with our commitment to building AI safely and consistent with our voluntary commitments to the White House, we are sharing the GPT-4o System Card, which includes our Preparedness Framework evaluations. In this System Card, we provide a detailed look at GPT-4o's capabilities, limitations, and safety evaluations across multiple categories, focusing on speech-to-speech while also evaluating text and image capabilities, and measures we've implemented to ensure the model is safe and aligned. We also include third-party assessments on dangerous capabilities, as well as discussion of potential societal impacts of GPT-4o's text and vision capabilities. △ Less

Submitted 25 October, 2024; originally announced October 2024.

Prover-Verifier Games improve legibility of LLM outputs

Authors: Jan Hendrik Kirchner, Yining Chen, Harri Edwards, Jan Leike, Nat McAleese, Yuri Burda

Abstract: One way to increase confidence in the outputs of Large Language Models (LLMs) is to support them with reasoning that is clear and easy to check -- a property we call legibility. We study legibility in the context of solving grade-school math problems and show that optimizing chain-of-thought solutions only for answer correctness can make them less legible. To mitigate the loss in legibility, we pr… ▽ More One way to increase confidence in the outputs of Large Language Models (LLMs) is to support them with reasoning that is clear and easy to check -- a property we call legibility. We study legibility in the context of solving grade-school math problems and show that optimizing chain-of-thought solutions only for answer correctness can make them less legible. To mitigate the loss in legibility, we propose a training algorithm inspired by Prover-Verifier Game from Anil et al. (2021). Our algorithm iteratively trains small verifiers to predict solution correctness, "helpful" provers to produce correct solutions that the verifier accepts, and "sneaky" provers to produce incorrect solutions that fool the verifier. We find that the helpful prover's accuracy and the verifier's robustness to adversarial attacks increase over the course of training. Furthermore, we show that legibility training transfers to time-constrained humans tasked with verifying solution correctness. Over course of LLM training human accuracy increases when checking the helpful prover's solutions, and decreases when checking the sneaky prover's solutions. Hence, training for checkability by small verifiers is a plausible technique for increasing output legibility. Our results suggest legibility training against small verifiers as a practical avenue for increasing legibility of large LLMs to humans, and thus could help with alignment of superhuman models. △ Less

Submitted 1 August, 2024; v1 submitted 18 July, 2024; originally announced July 2024.

LLM Critics Help Catch LLM Bugs

Authors: Nat McAleese, Rai Michael Pokorny, Juan Felipe Ceron Uribe, Evgenia Nitishinskaya, Maja Trebacz, Jan Leike

Abstract: Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is fundamentally limited by the capacity of humans to correctly evaluate model output. To improve human evaluation ability and overcome that limitation this work trains "critic" models that help humans to more accurately evaluate model-written code. These critics are themselves LLMs trained with RLHF to write natural language feedback highlighting… ▽ More Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is fundamentally limited by the capacity of humans to correctly evaluate model output. To improve human evaluation ability and overcome that limitation this work trains "critic" models that help humans to more accurately evaluate model-written code. These critics are themselves LLMs trained with RLHF to write natural language feedback highlighting problems in code from real-world assistant tasks. On code containing naturally occurring LLM errors model-written critiques are preferred over human critiques in 63% of cases, and human evaluation finds that models catch more bugs than human contractors paid for code review. We further confirm that our fine-tuned LLM critics can successfully identify hundreds of errors in ChatGPT training data rated as "flawless", even though the majority of those tasks are non-code tasks and thus out-of-distribution for the critic model. Critics can have limitations of their own, including hallucinated bugs that could mislead humans into making mistakes they might have otherwise avoided, but human-machine teams of critics and contractors catch similar numbers of bugs to LLM critics while hallucinating less than LLMs alone. △ Less

Submitted 28 June, 2024; originally announced July 2024.

Scaling and evaluating sparse autoencoders

Authors: Leo Gao, Tom Dupré la Tour, Henk Tillman, Gabriel Goh, Rajan Troll, Alec Radford, Ilya Sutskever, Jan Leike, Jeffrey Wu

Abstract: Sparse autoencoders provide a promising unsupervised approach for extracting interpretable features from a language model by reconstructing activations from a sparse bottleneck layer. Since language models learn many concepts, autoencoders need to be very large to recover all relevant features. However, studying the properties of autoencoder scaling is difficult due to the need to balance reconstr… ▽ More Sparse autoencoders provide a promising unsupervised approach for extracting interpretable features from a language model by reconstructing activations from a sparse bottleneck layer. Since language models learn many concepts, autoencoders need to be very large to recover all relevant features. However, studying the properties of autoencoder scaling is difficult due to the need to balance reconstruction and sparsity objectives and the presence of dead latents. We propose using k-sparse autoencoders [Makhzani and Frey, 2013] to directly control sparsity, simplifying tuning and improving the reconstruction-sparsity frontier. Additionally, we find modifications that result in few dead latents, even at the largest scales we tried. Using these techniques, we find clean scaling laws with respect to autoencoder size and sparsity. We also introduce several new metrics for evaluating feature quality based on the recovery of hypothesized features, the explainability of activation patterns, and the sparsity of downstream effects. These metrics all generally improve with autoencoder size. To demonstrate the scalability of our approach, we train a 16 million latent autoencoder on GPT-4 activations for 40 billion tokens. We release training code and autoencoders for open-source models, as well as a visualizer. △ Less

Submitted 6 June, 2024; originally announced June 2024.

Weak-to-Strong Generalization: Eliciting Strong Capabilities With Weak Supervision

Authors: Collin Burns, Pavel Izmailov, Jan Hendrik Kirchner, Bowen Baker, Leo Gao, Leopold Aschenbrenner, Yining Chen, Adrien Ecoffet, Manas Joglekar, Jan Leike, Ilya Sutskever, Jeff Wu

Abstract: Widely used alignment techniques, such as reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), rely on the ability of humans to supervise model behavior - for example, to evaluate whether a model faithfully followed instructions or generated safe outputs. However, future superhuman models will behave in complex ways too difficult for humans to reliably evaluate; humans will only be able to weakly su… ▽ More Widely used alignment techniques, such as reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), rely on the ability of humans to supervise model behavior - for example, to evaluate whether a model faithfully followed instructions or generated safe outputs. However, future superhuman models will behave in complex ways too difficult for humans to reliably evaluate; humans will only be able to weakly supervise superhuman models. We study an analogy to this problem: can weak model supervision elicit the full capabilities of a much stronger model? We test this using a range of pretrained language models in the GPT-4 family on natural language processing (NLP), chess, and reward modeling tasks. We find that when we naively finetune strong pretrained models on labels generated by a weak model, they consistently perform better than their weak supervisors, a phenomenon we call weak-to-strong generalization. However, we are still far from recovering the full capabilities of strong models with naive finetuning alone, suggesting that techniques like RLHF may scale poorly to superhuman models without further work. We find that simple methods can often significantly improve weak-to-strong generalization: for example, when finetuning GPT-4 with a GPT-2-level supervisor and an auxiliary confidence loss, we can recover close to GPT-3.5-level performance on NLP tasks. Our results suggest that it is feasible to make empirical progress today on a fundamental challenge of aligning superhuman models. △ Less

Submitted 14 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Let's Verify Step by Step

Authors: Hunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yura Burda, Harri Edwards, Bowen Baker, Teddy Lee, Jan Leike, John Schulman, Ilya Sutskever, Karl Cobbe

Abstract: In recent years, large language models have greatly improved in their ability to perform complex multi-step reasoning. However, even state-of-the-art models still regularly produce logical mistakes. To train more reliable models, we can turn either to outcome supervision, which provides feedback for a final result, or process supervision, which provides feedback for each intermediate reasoning ste… ▽ More In recent years, large language models have greatly improved in their ability to perform complex multi-step reasoning. However, even state-of-the-art models still regularly produce logical mistakes. To train more reliable models, we can turn either to outcome supervision, which provides feedback for a final result, or process supervision, which provides feedback for each intermediate reasoning step. Given the importance of training reliable models, and given the high cost of human feedback, it is important to carefully compare the both methods. Recent work has already begun this comparison, but many questions still remain. We conduct our own investigation, finding that process supervision significantly outperforms outcome supervision for training models to solve problems from the challenging MATH dataset. Our process-supervised model solves 78% of problems from a representative subset of the MATH test set. Additionally, we show that active learning significantly improves the efficacy of process supervision. To support related research, we also release PRM800K, the complete dataset of 800,000 step-level human feedback labels used to train our best reward model. △ Less

Submitted 31 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

GPT-4 Technical Report

Authors: OpenAI, Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, Red Avila, Igor Babuschkin, Suchir Balaji, Valerie Balcom, Paul Baltescu, Haiming Bao, Mohammad Bavarian, Jeff Belgum, Irwan Bello, Jake Berdine, Gabriel Bernadett-Shapiro, Christopher Berner, Lenny Bogdonoff, Oleg Boiko , et al. (256 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: We report the development of GPT-4, a large-scale, multimodal model which can accept image and text inputs and produce text outputs. While less capable than humans in many real-world scenarios, GPT-4 exhibits human-level performance on various professional and academic benchmarks, including passing a simulated bar exam with a score around the top 10% of test takers. GPT-4 is a Transformer-based mo… ▽ More We report the development of GPT-4, a large-scale, multimodal model which can accept image and text inputs and produce text outputs. While less capable than humans in many real-world scenarios, GPT-4 exhibits human-level performance on various professional and academic benchmarks, including passing a simulated bar exam with a score around the top 10% of test takers. GPT-4 is a Transformer-based model pre-trained to predict the next token in a document. The post-training alignment process results in improved performance on measures of factuality and adherence to desired behavior. A core component of this project was developing infrastructure and optimization methods that behave predictably across a wide range of scales. This allowed us to accurately predict some aspects of GPT-4's performance based on models trained with no more than 1/1,000th the compute of GPT-4. △ Less

Submitted 4 March, 2024; v1 submitted 15 March, 2023; originally announced March 2023.

Comments: 100 pages; updated authors list; fixed author names and added citation

Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluators

Authors: William Saunders, Catherine Yeh, Jeff Wu, Steven Bills, Long Ouyang, Jonathan Ward, Jan Leike

Abstract: We fine-tune large language models to write natural language critiques (natural language critical comments) using behavioral cloning. On a topic-based summarization task, critiques written by our models help humans find flaws in summaries that they would have otherwise missed. Our models help find naturally occurring flaws in both model and human written summaries, and intentional flaws in summari… ▽ More We fine-tune large language models to write natural language critiques (natural language critical comments) using behavioral cloning. On a topic-based summarization task, critiques written by our models help humans find flaws in summaries that they would have otherwise missed. Our models help find naturally occurring flaws in both model and human written summaries, and intentional flaws in summaries written by humans to be deliberately misleading. We study scaling properties of critiquing with both topic-based summarization and synthetic tasks. Larger models write more helpful critiques, and on most tasks, are better at self-critiquing, despite having harder-to-critique outputs. Larger models can also integrate their own self-critiques as feedback, refining their own summaries into better ones. Finally, we motivate and introduce a framework for comparing critiquing ability to generation and discrimination ability. Our measurements suggest that even large models may still have relevant knowledge they cannot or do not articulate as critiques. These results are a proof of concept for using AI-assisted human feedback to scale the supervision of machine learning systems to tasks that are difficult for humans to evaluate directly. We release our training datasets, as well as samples from our critique assistance experiments. △ Less

Submitted 13 June, 2022; v1 submitted 12 June, 2022; originally announced June 2022.

Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback

Authors: Long Ouyang, Jeff Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll L. Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, John Schulman, Jacob Hilton, Fraser Kelton, Luke Miller, Maddie Simens, Amanda Askell, Peter Welinder, Paul Christiano, Jan Leike, Ryan Lowe

Abstract: Making language models bigger does not inherently make them better at following a user's intent. For example, large language models can generate outputs that are untruthful, toxic, or simply not helpful to the user. In other words, these models are not aligned with their users. In this paper, we show an avenue for aligning language models with user intent on a wide range of tasks by fine-tuning wi… ▽ More Making language models bigger does not inherently make them better at following a user's intent. For example, large language models can generate outputs that are untruthful, toxic, or simply not helpful to the user. In other words, these models are not aligned with their users. In this paper, we show an avenue for aligning language models with user intent on a wide range of tasks by fine-tuning with human feedback. Starting with a set of labeler-written prompts and prompts submitted through the OpenAI API, we collect a dataset of labeler demonstrations of the desired model behavior, which we use to fine-tune GPT-3 using supervised learning. We then collect a dataset of rankings of model outputs, which we use to further fine-tune this supervised model using reinforcement learning from human feedback. We call the resulting models InstructGPT. In human evaluations on our prompt distribution, outputs from the 1.3B parameter InstructGPT model are preferred to outputs from the 175B GPT-3, despite having 100x fewer parameters. Moreover, InstructGPT models show improvements in truthfulness and reductions in toxic output generation while having minimal performance regressions on public NLP datasets. Even though InstructGPT still makes simple mistakes, our results show that fine-tuning with human feedback is a promising direction for aligning language models with human intent. △ Less

Submitted 4 March, 2022; originally announced March 2022.

Safe Deep RL in 3D Environments using Human Feedback

Authors: Matthew Rahtz, Vikrant Varma, Ramana Kumar, Zachary Kenton, Shane Legg, Jan Leike

Abstract: Agents should avoid unsafe behaviour during both training and deployment. This typically requires a simulator and a procedural specification of unsafe behaviour. Unfortunately, a simulator is not always available, and procedurally specifying constraints can be difficult or impossible for many real-world tasks. A recently introduced technique, ReQueST, aims to solve this problem by learning a neura… ▽ More Agents should avoid unsafe behaviour during both training and deployment. This typically requires a simulator and a procedural specification of unsafe behaviour. Unfortunately, a simulator is not always available, and procedurally specifying constraints can be difficult or impossible for many real-world tasks. A recently introduced technique, ReQueST, aims to solve this problem by learning a neural simulator of the environment from safe human trajectories, then using the learned simulator to efficiently learn a reward model from human feedback. However, it is yet unknown whether this approach is feasible in complex 3D environments with feedback obtained from real humans - whether sufficient pixel-based neural simulator quality can be achieved, and whether the human data requirements are viable in terms of both quantity and quality. In this paper we answer this question in the affirmative, using ReQueST to train an agent to perform a 3D first-person object collection task using data entirely from human contractors. We show that the resulting agent exhibits an order of magnitude reduction in unsafe behaviour compared to standard reinforcement learning. △ Less

Submitted 21 January, 2022; v1 submitted 20 January, 2022; originally announced January 2022.

Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback

Authors: Jeff Wu, Long Ouyang, Daniel M. Ziegler, Nisan Stiennon, Ryan Lowe, Jan Leike, Paul Christiano

Abstract: A major challenge for scaling machine learning is training models to perform tasks that are very difficult or time-consuming for humans to evaluate. We present progress on this problem on the task of abstractive summarization of entire fiction novels. Our method combines learning from human feedback with recursive task decomposition: we use models trained on smaller parts of the task to assist hum… ▽ More A major challenge for scaling machine learning is training models to perform tasks that are very difficult or time-consuming for humans to evaluate. We present progress on this problem on the task of abstractive summarization of entire fiction novels. Our method combines learning from human feedback with recursive task decomposition: we use models trained on smaller parts of the task to assist humans in giving feedback on the broader task. We collect a large volume of demonstrations and comparisons from human labelers, and fine-tune GPT-3 using behavioral cloning and reward modeling to do summarization recursively. At inference time, the model first summarizes small sections of the book and then recursively summarizes these summaries to produce a summary of the entire book. Our human labelers are able to supervise and evaluate the models quickly, despite not having read the entire books themselves. Our resulting model generates sensible summaries of entire books, even matching the quality of human-written summaries in a few cases ($\sim5\%$ of books). We achieve state-of-the-art results on the recent BookSum dataset for book-length summarization. A zero-shot question-answering model using these summaries achieves state-of-the-art results on the challenging NarrativeQA benchmark for answering questions about books and movie scripts. We release datasets of samples from our model. △ Less

Submitted 27 September, 2021; v1 submitted 22 September, 2021; originally announced September 2021.

Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code

Authors: Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, Alex Ray, Raul Puri, Gretchen Krueger, Michael Petrov, Heidy Khlaaf, Girish Sastry, Pamela Mishkin, Brooke Chan, Scott Gray, Nick Ryder, Mikhail Pavlov, Alethea Power, Lukasz Kaiser, Mohammad Bavarian, Clemens Winter , et al. (33 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: We introduce Codex, a GPT language model fine-tuned on publicly available code from GitHub, and study its Python code-writing capabilities. A distinct production version of Codex powers GitHub Copilot. On HumanEval, a new evaluation set we release to measure functional correctness for synthesizing programs from docstrings, our model solves 28.8% of the problems, while GPT-3 solves 0% and GPT-J sol… ▽ More We introduce Codex, a GPT language model fine-tuned on publicly available code from GitHub, and study its Python code-writing capabilities. A distinct production version of Codex powers GitHub Copilot. On HumanEval, a new evaluation set we release to measure functional correctness for synthesizing programs from docstrings, our model solves 28.8% of the problems, while GPT-3 solves 0% and GPT-J solves 11.4%. Furthermore, we find that repeated sampling from the model is a surprisingly effective strategy for producing working solutions to difficult prompts. Using this method, we solve 70.2% of our problems with 100 samples per problem. Careful investigation of our model reveals its limitations, including difficulty with docstrings describing long chains of operations and with binding operations to variables. Finally, we discuss the potential broader impacts of deploying powerful code generation technologies, covering safety, security, and economics. △ Less

Submitted 14 July, 2021; v1 submitted 7 July, 2021; originally announced July 2021.

Comments: corrected typos, added references, added authors, added acknowledgements

Institutionalising Ethics in AI through Broader Impact Requirements

Authors: Carina Prunkl, Carolyn Ashurst, Markus Anderljung, Helena Webb, Jan Leike, Allan Dafoe

Abstract: Turning principles into practice is one of the most pressing challenges of artificial intelligence (AI) governance. In this article, we reflect on a novel governance initiative by one of the world's largest AI conferences. In 2020, the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) introduced a requirement for submitting authors to include a statement on the broader societal impacts… ▽ More Turning principles into practice is one of the most pressing challenges of artificial intelligence (AI) governance. In this article, we reflect on a novel governance initiative by one of the world's largest AI conferences. In 2020, the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) introduced a requirement for submitting authors to include a statement on the broader societal impacts of their research. Drawing insights from similar governance initiatives, including institutional review boards (IRBs) and impact requirements for funding applications, we investigate the risks, challenges and potential benefits of such an initiative. Among the challenges, we list a lack of recognised best practice and procedural transparency, researcher opportunity costs, institutional and social pressures, cognitive biases, and the inherently difficult nature of the task. The potential benefits, on the other hand, include improved anticipation and identification of impacts, better communication with policy and governance experts, and a general strengthening of the norms around responsible research. To maximise the chance of success, we recommend measures to increase transparency, improve guidance, create incentives to engage earnestly with the process, and facilitate public deliberation on the requirement's merits and future. Perhaps the most important contribution from this analysis are the insights we can gain regarding effective community-based governance and the role and responsibility of the AI research community more broadly. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Journal ref: Nature Machine Intelligence 3.2 (2021): 104-110

Active Reinforcement Learning: Observing Rewards at a Cost

Authors: David Krueger, Jan Leike, Owain Evans, John Salvatier

Abstract: Active reinforcement learning (ARL) is a variant on reinforcement learning where the agent does not observe the reward unless it chooses to pay a query cost c > 0. The central question of ARL is how to quantify the long-term value of reward information. Even in multi-armed bandits, computing the value of this information is intractable and we have to rely on heuristics. We propose and evaluate sev… ▽ More Active reinforcement learning (ARL) is a variant on reinforcement learning where the agent does not observe the reward unless it chooses to pay a query cost c > 0. The central question of ARL is how to quantify the long-term value of reward information. Even in multi-armed bandits, computing the value of this information is intractable and we have to rely on heuristics. We propose and evaluate several heuristic approaches for ARL in multi-armed bandits and (tabular) Markov decision processes, and discuss and illustrate some challenging aspects of the ARL problem. △ Less

Submitted 24 November, 2020; v1 submitted 12 November, 2020; originally announced November 2020.

Comments: Originally appeared at the NeurIPS 2016 "Future of Interactive Learning Machines (FILM)" workshop

Hidden Incentives for Auto-Induced Distributional Shift

Authors: David Krueger, Tegan Maharaj, Jan Leike

Abstract: Decisions made by machine learning systems have increasing influence on the world, yet it is common for machine learning algorithms to assume that no such influence exists. An example is the use of the i.i.d. assumption in content recommendation. In fact, the (choice of) content displayed can change users' perceptions and preferences, or even drive them away, causing a shift in the distribution of… ▽ More Decisions made by machine learning systems have increasing influence on the world, yet it is common for machine learning algorithms to assume that no such influence exists. An example is the use of the i.i.d. assumption in content recommendation. In fact, the (choice of) content displayed can change users' perceptions and preferences, or even drive them away, causing a shift in the distribution of users. We introduce the term auto-induced distributional shift (ADS) to describe the phenomenon of an algorithm causing a change in the distribution of its own inputs. Our goal is to ensure that machine learning systems do not leverage ADS to increase performance when doing so could be undesirable. We demonstrate that changes to the learning algorithm, such as the introduction of meta-learning, can cause hidden incentives for auto-induced distributional shift (HI-ADS) to be revealed. To address this issue, we introduce `unit tests' and a mitigation strategy for HI-ADS, as well as a toy environment for modelling real-world issues with HI-ADS in content recommendation, where we demonstrate that strong meta-learners achieve gains in performance via ADS. We show meta-learning and Q-learning both sometimes fail unit tests, but pass when using our mitigation strategy. △ Less

Submitted 18 September, 2020; originally announced September 2020.

Quantifying Differences in Reward Functions

Authors: Adam Gleave, Michael Dennis, Shane Legg, Stuart Russell, Jan Leike

Abstract: For many tasks, the reward function is inaccessible to introspection or too complex to be specified procedurally, and must instead be learned from user data. Prior work has evaluated learned reward functions by evaluating policies optimized for the learned reward. However, this method cannot distinguish between the learned reward function failing to reflect user preferences and the policy optimiza… ▽ More For many tasks, the reward function is inaccessible to introspection or too complex to be specified procedurally, and must instead be learned from user data. Prior work has evaluated learned reward functions by evaluating policies optimized for the learned reward. However, this method cannot distinguish between the learned reward function failing to reflect user preferences and the policy optimization process failing to optimize the learned reward. Moreover, this method can only tell us about behavior in the evaluation environment, but the reward may incentivize very different behavior in even a slightly different deployment environment. To address these problems, we introduce the Equivalent-Policy Invariant Comparison (EPIC) distance to quantify the difference between two reward functions directly, without a policy optimization step. We prove EPIC is invariant on an equivalence class of reward functions that always induce the same optimal policy. Furthermore, we find EPIC can be efficiently approximated and is more robust than baselines to the choice of coverage distribution. Finally, we show that EPIC distance bounds the regret of optimal policies even under different transition dynamics, and we confirm empirically that it predicts policy training success. Our source code is available at https://github.com/HumanCompatibleAI/evaluating-rewards. △ Less

Submitted 17 March, 2021; v1 submitted 24 June, 2020; originally announced June 2020.

Comments: Published at ICLR 2021. 9 pages main paper, 42 pages total

ACM Class: I.2.6

Pitfalls of learning a reward function online

Authors: Stuart Armstrong, Jan Leike, Laurent Orseau, Shane Legg

Abstract: In some agent designs like inverse reinforcement learning an agent needs to learn its own reward function. Learning the reward function and optimising for it are typically two different processes, usually performed at different stages. We consider a continual (``one life'') learning approach where the agent both learns the reward function and optimises for it at the same time. We show that this co… ▽ More In some agent designs like inverse reinforcement learning an agent needs to learn its own reward function. Learning the reward function and optimising for it are typically two different processes, usually performed at different stages. We consider a continual (``one life'') learning approach where the agent both learns the reward function and optimises for it at the same time. We show that this comes with a number of pitfalls, such as deliberately manipulating the learning process in one direction, refusing to learn, ``learning'' facts already known to the agent, and making decisions that are strictly dominated (for all relevant reward functions). We formally introduce two desirable properties: the first is `unriggability', which prevents the agent from steering the learning process in the direction of a reward function that is easier to optimise. The second is `uninfluenceability', whereby the reward-function learning process operates by learning facts about the environment. We show that an uninfluenceable process is automatically unriggable, and if the set of possible environments is sufficiently rich, the converse is true too. △ Less

Submitted 28 April, 2020; originally announced April 2020.

Learning Human Objectives by Evaluating Hypothetical Behavior

Authors: Siddharth Reddy, Anca D. Dragan, Sergey Levine, Shane Legg, Jan Leike

Abstract: We seek to align agent behavior with a user's objectives in a reinforcement learning setting with unknown dynamics, an unknown reward function, and unknown unsafe states. The user knows the rewards and unsafe states, but querying the user is expensive. To address this challenge, we propose an algorithm that safely and interactively learns a model of the user's reward function. We start with a gene… ▽ More We seek to align agent behavior with a user's objectives in a reinforcement learning setting with unknown dynamics, an unknown reward function, and unknown unsafe states. The user knows the rewards and unsafe states, but querying the user is expensive. To address this challenge, we propose an algorithm that safely and interactively learns a model of the user's reward function. We start with a generative model of initial states and a forward dynamics model trained on off-policy data. Our method uses these models to synthesize hypothetical behaviors, asks the user to label the behaviors with rewards, and trains a neural network to predict the rewards. The key idea is to actively synthesize the hypothetical behaviors from scratch by maximizing tractable proxies for the value of information, without interacting with the environment. We call this method reward query synthesis via trajectory optimization (ReQueST). We evaluate ReQueST with simulated users on a state-based 2D navigation task and the image-based Car Racing video game. The results show that ReQueST significantly outperforms prior methods in learning reward models that transfer to new environments with different initial state distributions. Moreover, ReQueST safely trains the reward model to detect unsafe states, and corrects reward hacking before deploying the agent. △ Less

Submitted 24 March, 2021; v1 submitted 5 December, 2019; originally announced December 2019.

Comments: Published at International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) 2020

Scaling shared model governance via model splitting

Authors: Miljan Martic, Jan Leike, Andrew Trask, Matteo Hessel, Shane Legg, Pushmeet Kohli

Abstract: Currently the only techniques for sharing governance of a deep learning model are homomorphic encryption and secure multiparty computation. Unfortunately, neither of these techniques is applicable to the training of large neural networks due to their large computational and communication overheads. As a scalable technique for shared model governance, we propose splitting deep learning model betwee… ▽ More Currently the only techniques for sharing governance of a deep learning model are homomorphic encryption and secure multiparty computation. Unfortunately, neither of these techniques is applicable to the training of large neural networks due to their large computational and communication overheads. As a scalable technique for shared model governance, we propose splitting deep learning model between multiple parties. This paper empirically investigates the security guarantee of this technique, which is introduced as the problem of model completion: Given the entire training data set or an environment simulator, and a subset of the parameters of a trained deep learning model, how much training is required to recover the model's original performance? We define a metric for evaluating the hardness of the model completion problem and study it empirically in both supervised learning on ImageNet and reinforcement learning on Atari and DeepMind~Lab. Our experiments show that (1) the model completion problem is harder in reinforcement learning than in supervised learning because of the unavailability of the trained agent's trajectories, and (2) its hardness depends not primarily on the number of parameters of the missing part, but more so on their type and location. Our results suggest that model splitting might be a feasible technique for shared model governance in some settings where training is very expensive. △ Less

Submitted 14 December, 2018; originally announced December 2018.

Comments: 9 pages

Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research direction

Authors: Jan Leike, David Krueger, Tom Everitt, Miljan Martic, Vishal Maini, Shane Legg

Abstract: One obstacle to applying reinforcement learning algorithms to real-world problems is the lack of suitable reward functions. Designing such reward functions is difficult in part because the user only has an implicit understanding of the task objective. This gives rise to the agent alignment problem: how do we create agents that behave in accordance with the user's intentions? We outline a high-leve… ▽ More One obstacle to applying reinforcement learning algorithms to real-world problems is the lack of suitable reward functions. Designing such reward functions is difficult in part because the user only has an implicit understanding of the task objective. This gives rise to the agent alignment problem: how do we create agents that behave in accordance with the user's intentions? We outline a high-level research direction to solve the agent alignment problem centered around reward modeling: learning a reward function from interaction with the user and optimizing the learned reward function with reinforcement learning. We discuss the key challenges we expect to face when scaling reward modeling to complex and general domains, concrete approaches to mitigate these challenges, and ways to establish trust in the resulting agents. △ Less

Submitted 19 November, 2018; originally announced November 2018.

Reward learning from human preferences and demonstrations in Atari

Authors: Borja Ibarz, Jan Leike, Tobias Pohlen, Geoffrey Irving, Shane Legg, Dario Amodei

Abstract: To solve complex real-world problems with reinforcement learning, we cannot rely on manually specified reward functions. Instead, we can have humans communicate an objective to the agent directly. In this work, we combine two approaches to learning from human feedback: expert demonstrations and trajectory preferences. We train a deep neural network to model the reward function and use its predicte… ▽ More To solve complex real-world problems with reinforcement learning, we cannot rely on manually specified reward functions. Instead, we can have humans communicate an objective to the agent directly. In this work, we combine two approaches to learning from human feedback: expert demonstrations and trajectory preferences. We train a deep neural network to model the reward function and use its predicted reward to train an DQN-based deep reinforcement learning agent on 9 Atari games. Our approach beats the imitation learning baseline in 7 games and achieves strictly superhuman performance on 2 games without using game rewards. Additionally, we investigate the goodness of fit of the reward model, present some reward hacking problems, and study the effects of noise in the human labels. △ Less

Submitted 15 November, 2018; originally announced November 2018.

Comments: NIPS 2018

Learning to Understand Goal Specifications by Modelling Reward

Authors: Dzmitry Bahdanau, Felix Hill, Jan Leike, Edward Hughes, Arian Hosseini, Pushmeet Kohli, Edward Grefenstette

Abstract: Recent work has shown that deep reinforcement-learning agents can learn to follow language-like instructions from infrequent environment rewards. However, this places on environment designers the onus of designing language-conditional reward functions which may not be easily or tractably implemented as the complexity of the environment and the language scales. To overcome this limitation, we prese… ▽ More Recent work has shown that deep reinforcement-learning agents can learn to follow language-like instructions from infrequent environment rewards. However, this places on environment designers the onus of designing language-conditional reward functions which may not be easily or tractably implemented as the complexity of the environment and the language scales. To overcome this limitation, we present a framework within which instruction-conditional RL agents are trained using rewards obtained not from the environment, but from reward models which are jointly trained from expert examples. As reward models improve, they learn to accurately reward agents for completing tasks for environment configurations---and for instructions---not present amongst the expert data. This framework effectively separates the representation of what instructions require from how they can be executed. In a simple grid world, it enables an agent to learn a range of commands requiring interaction with blocks and understanding of spatial relations and underspecified abstract arrangements. We further show the method allows our agent to adapt to changes in the environment without requiring new expert examples. △ Less

Submitted 23 December, 2019; v1 submitted 5 June, 2018; originally announced June 2018.

Comments: 19 pages, 9 figures

AI Safety Gridworlds

Authors: Jan Leike, Miljan Martic, Victoria Krakovna, Pedro A. Ortega, Tom Everitt, Andrew Lefrancq, Laurent Orseau, Shane Legg

Abstract: We present a suite of reinforcement learning environments illustrating various safety properties of intelligent agents. These problems include safe interruptibility, avoiding side effects, absent supervisor, reward gaming, safe exploration, as well as robustness to self-modification, distributional shift, and adversaries. To measure compliance with the intended safe behavior, we equip each environ… ▽ More We present a suite of reinforcement learning environments illustrating various safety properties of intelligent agents. These problems include safe interruptibility, avoiding side effects, absent supervisor, reward gaming, safe exploration, as well as robustness to self-modification, distributional shift, and adversaries. To measure compliance with the intended safe behavior, we equip each environment with a performance function that is hidden from the agent. This allows us to categorize AI safety problems into robustness and specification problems, depending on whether the performance function corresponds to the observed reward function. We evaluate A2C and Rainbow, two recent deep reinforcement learning agents, on our environments and show that they are not able to solve them satisfactorily. △ Less

Submitted 28 November, 2017; v1 submitted 27 November, 2017; originally announced November 2017.

Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences

Authors: Paul Christiano, Jan Leike, Tom B. Brown, Miljan Martic, Shane Legg, Dario Amodei

Abstract: For sophisticated reinforcement learning (RL) systems to interact usefully with real-world environments, we need to communicate complex goals to these systems. In this work, we explore goals defined in terms of (non-expert) human preferences between pairs of trajectory segments. We show that this approach can effectively solve complex RL tasks without access to the reward function, including Atari… ▽ More For sophisticated reinforcement learning (RL) systems to interact usefully with real-world environments, we need to communicate complex goals to these systems. In this work, we explore goals defined in terms of (non-expert) human preferences between pairs of trajectory segments. We show that this approach can effectively solve complex RL tasks without access to the reward function, including Atari games and simulated robot locomotion, while providing feedback on less than one percent of our agent's interactions with the environment. This reduces the cost of human oversight far enough that it can be practically applied to state-of-the-art RL systems. To demonstrate the flexibility of our approach, we show that we can successfully train complex novel behaviors with about an hour of human time. These behaviors and environments are considerably more complex than any that have been previously learned from human feedback. △ Less

Submitted 17 February, 2023; v1 submitted 12 June, 2017; originally announced June 2017.

Universal Reinforcement Learning Algorithms: Survey and Experiments

Authors: John Aslanides, Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: Many state-of-the-art reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms typically assume that the environment is an ergodic Markov Decision Process (MDP). In contrast, the field of universal reinforcement learning (URL) is concerned with algorithms that make as few assumptions as possible about the environment. The universal Bayesian agent AIXI and a family of related URL algorithms have been developed in th… ▽ More Many state-of-the-art reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms typically assume that the environment is an ergodic Markov Decision Process (MDP). In contrast, the field of universal reinforcement learning (URL) is concerned with algorithms that make as few assumptions as possible about the environment. The universal Bayesian agent AIXI and a family of related URL algorithms have been developed in this setting. While numerous theoretical optimality results have been proven for these agents, there has been no empirical investigation of their behavior to date. We present a short and accessible survey of these URL algorithms under a unified notation and framework, along with results of some experiments that qualitatively illustrate some properties of the resulting policies, and their relative performance on partially-observable gridworld environments. We also present an open-source reference implementation of the algorithms which we hope will facilitate further understanding of, and experimentation with, these ideas. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2017; originally announced May 2017.

Comments: 8 pages, 6 figures, Twenty-sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-17)

Generalised Discount Functions applied to a Monte-Carlo AImu Implementation

Authors: Sean Lamont, John Aslanides, Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: In recent years, work has been done to develop the theory of General Reinforcement Learning (GRL). However, there are few examples demonstrating these results in a concrete way. In particular, there are no examples demonstrating the known results regarding gener- alised discounting. We have added to the GRL simulation platform AIXIjs the functionality to assign an agent arbitrary discount function… ▽ More In recent years, work has been done to develop the theory of General Reinforcement Learning (GRL). However, there are few examples demonstrating these results in a concrete way. In particular, there are no examples demonstrating the known results regarding gener- alised discounting. We have added to the GRL simulation platform AIXIjs the functionality to assign an agent arbitrary discount functions, and an environment which can be used to determine the effect of discounting on an agent's policy. Using this, we investigate how geometric, hyperbolic and power discounting affect an informed agent in a simple MDP. We experimentally reproduce a number of theoretical results, and discuss some related subtleties. It was found that the agent's behaviour followed what is expected theoretically, assuming appropriate parameters were chosen for the Monte-Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) planning algorithm. △ Less

Submitted 3 March, 2017; originally announced March 2017.

Comments: 12 pages, 4 figures

Nonparametric General Reinforcement Learning

Authors: Jan Leike

Abstract: Reinforcement learning (RL) problems are often phrased in terms of Markov decision processes (MDPs). In this thesis we go beyond MDPs and consider RL in environments that are non-Markovian, non-ergodic and only partially observable. Our focus is not on practical algorithms, but rather on the fundamental underlying problems: How do we balance exploration and exploitation? How do we explore optimall… ▽ More Reinforcement learning (RL) problems are often phrased in terms of Markov decision processes (MDPs). In this thesis we go beyond MDPs and consider RL in environments that are non-Markovian, non-ergodic and only partially observable. Our focus is not on practical algorithms, but rather on the fundamental underlying problems: How do we balance exploration and exploitation? How do we explore optimally? When is an agent optimal? We follow the nonparametric realizable paradigm. We establish negative results on Bayesian RL agents, in particular AIXI. We show that unlucky or adversarial choices of the prior cause the agent to misbehave drastically. Therefore Legg-Hutter intelligence and balanced Pareto optimality, which depend crucially on the choice of the prior, are entirely subjective. Moreover, in the class of all computable environments every policy is Pareto optimal. This undermines all existing optimality properties for AIXI. However, there are Bayesian approaches to general RL that satisfy objective optimality guarantees: We prove that Thompson sampling is asymptotically optimal in stochastic environments in the sense that its value converges to the value of the optimal policy. We connect asymptotic optimality to regret given a recoverability assumption on the environment that allows the agent to recover from mistakes. Hence Thompson sampling achieves sublinear regret in these environments. Our results culminate in a formal solution to the grain of truth problem: A Bayesian agent acting in a multi-agent environment learns to predict the other agents' policies if its prior assigns positive probability to them (the prior contains a grain of truth). We construct a large but limit computable class containing a grain of truth and show that agents based on Thompson sampling over this class converge to play Nash equilibria in arbitrary unknown computable multi-agent environments. △ Less

Submitted 27 November, 2016; originally announced November 2016.

Comments: PhD thesis

Geometric Nontermination Arguments

Authors: Jan Leike, Matthias Heizmann

Abstract: We present a new kind of nontermination argument, called geometric nontermination argument. The geometric nontermination argument is a finite representation of an infinite execution that has the form of a sum of several geometric series. For so-called linear lasso programs we can decide the existence of a geometric nontermination argument using a nonlinear algebraic $\exists$-constraint. We show t… ▽ More We present a new kind of nontermination argument, called geometric nontermination argument. The geometric nontermination argument is a finite representation of an infinite execution that has the form of a sum of several geometric series. For so-called linear lasso programs we can decide the existence of a geometric nontermination argument using a nonlinear algebraic $\exists$-constraint. We show that a deterministic conjunctive loop program with nonnegative eigenvalues is nonterminating if an only if there exists a geometric nontermination argument. Furthermore, we present an evaluation that demonstrates that our method is feasible in practice. △ Less

Submitted 16 September, 2016; originally announced September 2016.

Comments: 18 pages

A Formal Solution to the Grain of Truth Problem

Authors: Jan Leike, Jessica Taylor, Benya Fallenstein

Abstract: A Bayesian agent acting in a multi-agent environment learns to predict the other agents' policies if its prior assigns positive probability to them (in other words, its prior contains a \emph{grain of truth}). Finding a reasonably large class of policies that contains the Bayes-optimal policies with respect to this class is known as the \emph{grain of truth problem}. Only small classes are known t… ▽ More A Bayesian agent acting in a multi-agent environment learns to predict the other agents' policies if its prior assigns positive probability to them (in other words, its prior contains a \emph{grain of truth}). Finding a reasonably large class of policies that contains the Bayes-optimal policies with respect to this class is known as the \emph{grain of truth problem}. Only small classes are known to have a grain of truth and the literature contains several related impossibility results. In this paper we present a formal and general solution to the full grain of truth problem: we construct a class of policies that contains all computable policies as well as Bayes-optimal policies for every lower semicomputable prior over the class. When the environment is unknown, Bayes-optimal agents may fail to act optimally even asymptotically. However, agents based on Thompson sampling converge to play ε-Nash equilibria in arbitrary unknown computable multi-agent environments. While these results are purely theoretical, we show that they can be computationally approximated arbitrarily closely. △ Less

Submitted 16 September, 2016; originally announced September 2016.

Comments: UAI 2016

Exploration Potential

Authors: Jan Leike

Abstract: We introduce exploration potential, a quantity that measures how much a reinforcement learning agent has explored its environment class. In contrast to information gain, exploration potential takes the problem's reward structure into account. This leads to an exploration criterion that is both necessary and sufficient for asymptotic optimality (learning to act optimally across the entire environme… ▽ More We introduce exploration potential, a quantity that measures how much a reinforcement learning agent has explored its environment class. In contrast to information gain, exploration potential takes the problem's reward structure into account. This leads to an exploration criterion that is both necessary and sufficient for asymptotic optimality (learning to act optimally across the entire environment class). Our experiments in multi-armed bandits use exploration potential to illustrate how different algorithms make the tradeoff between exploration and exploitation. △ Less

Submitted 18 November, 2016; v1 submitted 16 September, 2016; originally announced September 2016.

Comments: 10 pages, including proofs

Loss Bounds and Time Complexity for Speed Priors

Authors: Daniel Filan, Marcus Hutter, Jan Leike

Abstract: This paper establishes for the first time the predictive performance of speed priors and their computational complexity. A speed prior is essentially a probability distribution that puts low probability on strings that are not efficiently computable. We propose a variant to the original speed prior (Schmidhuber, 2002), and show that our prior can predict sequences drawn from probability measures t… ▽ More This paper establishes for the first time the predictive performance of speed priors and their computational complexity. A speed prior is essentially a probability distribution that puts low probability on strings that are not efficiently computable. We propose a variant to the original speed prior (Schmidhuber, 2002), and show that our prior can predict sequences drawn from probability measures that are estimable in polynomial time. Our speed prior is computable in doubly-exponential time, but not in polynomial time. On a polynomial time computable sequence our speed prior is computable in exponential time. We show better upper complexity bounds for Schmidhuber's speed prior under the same conditions, and that it predicts deterministic sequences that are computable in polynomial time; however, we also show that it is not computable in polynomial time, and the question of its predictive properties for stochastic sequences remains open. △ Less

Submitted 12 April, 2016; originally announced April 2016.

Comments: AISTATS 2016

Thompson Sampling is Asymptotically Optimal in General Environments

Authors: Jan Leike, Tor Lattimore, Laurent Orseau, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: We discuss a variant of Thompson sampling for nonparametric reinforcement learning in a countable classes of general stochastic environments. These environments can be non-Markov, non-ergodic, and partially observable. We show that Thompson sampling learns the environment class in the sense that (1) asymptotically its value converges to the optimal value in mean and (2) given a recoverability assu… ▽ More We discuss a variant of Thompson sampling for nonparametric reinforcement learning in a countable classes of general stochastic environments. These environments can be non-Markov, non-ergodic, and partially observable. We show that Thompson sampling learns the environment class in the sense that (1) asymptotically its value converges to the optimal value in mean and (2) given a recoverability assumption regret is sublinear. △ Less

Submitted 3 June, 2016; v1 submitted 25 February, 2016; originally announced February 2016.

Comments: UAI 2016

On the Computability of AIXI

Authors: Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: How could we solve the machine learning and the artificial intelligence problem if we had infinite computation? Solomonoff induction and the reinforcement learning agent AIXI are proposed answers to this question. Both are known to be incomputable. In this paper, we quantify this using the arithmetical hierarchy, and prove upper and corresponding lower bounds for incomputability. We show that AIXI… ▽ More How could we solve the machine learning and the artificial intelligence problem if we had infinite computation? Solomonoff induction and the reinforcement learning agent AIXI are proposed answers to this question. Both are known to be incomputable. In this paper, we quantify this using the arithmetical hierarchy, and prove upper and corresponding lower bounds for incomputability. We show that AIXI is not limit computable, thus it cannot be approximated using finite computation. Our main result is a limit-computable ε-optimal version of AIXI with infinite horizon that maximizes expected rewards. △ Less

Submitted 19 October, 2015; originally announced October 2015.

Comments: UAI 2015

Bad Universal Priors and Notions of Optimality

Authors: Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: A big open question of algorithmic information theory is the choice of the universal Turing machine (UTM). For Kolmogorov complexity and Solomonoff induction we have invariance theorems: the choice of the UTM changes bounds only by a constant. For the universally intelligent agent AIXI (Hutter, 2005) no invariance theorem is known. Our results are entirely negative: we discuss cases in which unluc… ▽ More A big open question of algorithmic information theory is the choice of the universal Turing machine (UTM). For Kolmogorov complexity and Solomonoff induction we have invariance theorems: the choice of the UTM changes bounds only by a constant. For the universally intelligent agent AIXI (Hutter, 2005) no invariance theorem is known. Our results are entirely negative: we discuss cases in which unlucky or adversarial choices of the UTM cause AIXI to misbehave drastically. We show that Legg-Hutter intelligence and thus balanced Pareto optimality is entirely subjective, and that every policy is Pareto optimal in the class of all computable environments. This undermines all existing optimality properties for AIXI. While it may still serve as a gold standard for AI, our results imply that AIXI is a relative theory, dependent on the choice of the UTM. △ Less

Submitted 16 October, 2015; originally announced October 2015.

Comments: COLT 2015

On the Computability of Solomonoff Induction and Knowledge-Seeking

Authors: Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: Solomonoff induction is held as a gold standard for learning, but it is known to be incomputable. We quantify its incomputability by placing various flavors of Solomonoff's prior M in the arithmetical hierarchy. We also derive computability bounds for knowledge-seeking agents, and give a limit-computable weakly asymptotically optimal reinforcement learning agent. Solomonoff induction is held as a gold standard for learning, but it is known to be incomputable. We quantify its incomputability by placing various flavors of Solomonoff's prior M in the arithmetical hierarchy. We also derive computability bounds for knowledge-seeking agents, and give a limit-computable weakly asymptotically optimal reinforcement learning agent. △ Less

Submitted 15 July, 2015; originally announced July 2015.

Comments: ALT 2015

Solomonoff Induction Violates Nicod's Criterion

Authors: Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: Nicod's criterion states that observing a black raven is evidence for the hypothesis H that all ravens are black. We show that Solomonoff induction does not satisfy Nicod's criterion: there are time steps in which observing black ravens decreases the belief in H. Moreover, while observing any computable infinite string compatible with H, the belief in H decreases infinitely often when using the un… ▽ More Nicod's criterion states that observing a black raven is evidence for the hypothesis H that all ravens are black. We show that Solomonoff induction does not satisfy Nicod's criterion: there are time steps in which observing black ravens decreases the belief in H. Moreover, while observing any computable infinite string compatible with H, the belief in H decreases infinitely often when using the unnormalized Solomonoff prior, but only finitely often when using the normalized Solomonoff prior. We argue that the fault is not with Solomonoff induction; instead we should reject Nicod's criterion. △ Less

Submitted 15 July, 2015; originally announced July 2015.

Comments: ALT 2015

Sequential Extensions of Causal and Evidential Decision Theory

Authors: Tom Everitt, Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: Moving beyond the dualistic view in AI where agent and environment are separated incurs new challenges for decision making, as calculation of expected utility is no longer straightforward. The non-dualistic decision theory literature is split between causal decision theory and evidential decision theory. We extend these decision algorithms to the sequential setting where the agent alternates betwe… ▽ More Moving beyond the dualistic view in AI where agent and environment are separated incurs new challenges for decision making, as calculation of expected utility is no longer straightforward. The non-dualistic decision theory literature is split between causal decision theory and evidential decision theory. We extend these decision algorithms to the sequential setting where the agent alternates between taking actions and observing their consequences. We find that evidential decision theory has two natural extensions while causal decision theory only has one. △ Less

Submitted 24 June, 2015; originally announced June 2015.

Comments: ADT 2015

A Definition of Happiness for Reinforcement Learning Agents

Authors: Mayank Daswani, Jan Leike

Abstract: What is happiness for reinforcement learning agents? We seek a formal definition satisfying a list of desiderata. Our proposed definition of happiness is the temporal difference error, i.e. the difference between the value of the obtained reward and observation and the agent's expectation of this value. This definition satisfies most of our desiderata and is compatible with empirical research on h… ▽ More What is happiness for reinforcement learning agents? We seek a formal definition satisfying a list of desiderata. Our proposed definition of happiness is the temporal difference error, i.e. the difference between the value of the obtained reward and observation and the agent's expectation of this value. This definition satisfies most of our desiderata and is compatible with empirical research on humans. We state several implications and discuss examples. △ Less

Submitted 17 May, 2015; originally announced May 2015.

Comments: AGI 2015

Ranking Templates for Linear Loops

Authors: Jan Leike, Matthias Heizmann

Abstract: We present a new method for the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments for linear loop programs based on linear ranking templates. Linear ranking templates are parameterized, well-founded relations such that an assignment to the parameters gives rise to a ranking function. Our approach generalizes existing methods and enables us to use templates for many different ranking functions wi… ▽ More We present a new method for the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments for linear loop programs based on linear ranking templates. Linear ranking templates are parameterized, well-founded relations such that an assignment to the parameters gives rise to a ranking function. Our approach generalizes existing methods and enables us to use templates for many different ranking functions with affine-linear components. We discuss templates for multiphase, nested, piecewise, parallel, and lexicographic ranking functions. These ranking templates can be combined to form more powerful templates. Because these ranking templates require both strict and non-strict inequalities, we use Motzkin's transposition theorem instead of Farkas' lemma to transform the generated $\exists\forall$-constraint into an $\exists$-constraint. △ Less

Submitted 29 March, 2015; v1 submitted 28 February, 2015; originally announced March 2015.

Journal ref: Logical Methods in Computer Science, Volume 11, Issue 1 (March 31, 2015) lmcs:797

Indefinitely Oscillating Martingales

Authors: Jan Leike, Marcus Hutter

Abstract: We construct a class of nonnegative martingale processes that oscillate indefinitely with high probability. For these processes, we state a uniform rate of the number of oscillations and show that this rate is asymptotically close to the theoretical upper bound. These bounds on probability and expectation of the number of upcrossings are compared to classical bounds from the martingale literature.… ▽ More We construct a class of nonnegative martingale processes that oscillate indefinitely with high probability. For these processes, we state a uniform rate of the number of oscillations and show that this rate is asymptotically close to the theoretical upper bound. These bounds on probability and expectation of the number of upcrossings are compared to classical bounds from the martingale literature. We discuss two applications. First, our results imply that the limit of the minimum description length operator may not exist. Second, we give bounds on how often one can change one's belief in a given hypothesis when observing a stream of data. △ Less

Submitted 13 August, 2014; originally announced August 2014.

Comments: ALT 2014, extended technical report

Geometric Series as Nontermination Arguments for Linear Lasso Programs

Authors: Jan Leike, Matthias Heizmann

Abstract: We present a new kind of nontermination argument for linear lasso programs, called geometric nontermination argument. A geometric nontermination argument is a finite representation of an infinite execution of the form $(\vec{x} + \sum_{i=0}^t λ^i \vec{y})_{t \geq 0}$. The existence of this nontermination argument can be stated as a set of nonlinear algebraic constraints. We show that every linear… ▽ More We present a new kind of nontermination argument for linear lasso programs, called geometric nontermination argument. A geometric nontermination argument is a finite representation of an infinite execution of the form $(\vec{x} + \sum_{i=0}^t λ^i \vec{y})_{t \geq 0}$. The existence of this nontermination argument can be stated as a set of nonlinear algebraic constraints. We show that every linear loop program that has a bounded infinite execution also has a geometric nontermination argument. Furthermore, we discuss nonterminating programs that do not have a geometric nontermination argument. △ Less

Submitted 17 May, 2014; originally announced May 2014.

Comments: WST 2014

Ranking Function Synthesis for Linear Lasso Programs

Authors: Jan Leike

Abstract: The scope of this work is the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments for the restricted class of programs called linear lasso programs. A termination argument consists of a ranking function as well as a set of supporting invariants. We extend existing methods in several ways. First, we use Motzkin's Transposition Theorem instead of Farkas' Lemma. This allows us to consider linear la… ▽ More The scope of this work is the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments for the restricted class of programs called linear lasso programs. A termination argument consists of a ranking function as well as a set of supporting invariants. We extend existing methods in several ways. First, we use Motzkin's Transposition Theorem instead of Farkas' Lemma. This allows us to consider linear lasso programs that can additionally contain strict inequalities. Existing methods are restricted to non-strict inequalities and equalities. Second, we consider several kinds of ranking functions: affine-linear, piecewise and lexicographic ranking functions. Moreover, we present a novel kind of ranking function called multiphase ranking function which proceeds through a fixed number of phases such that for each phase, there is an affine-linear ranking function. As an abstraction to the synthesis of specific ranking functions, we introduce the notion ranking function template. This enables us to handle all ranking functions in a unified way. Our method relies on non-linear algebraic constraint solving as a subroutine which is known to scale poorly to large problems. As a mitigation we formalize an assessment of the difficulty of our constraints and present an argument why they are of an easier kind than general non-linear constraints. We prove our method to be complete: if there is a termination argument of the form specified by the given ranking function template with a fixed number of affine-linear supporting invariants, then our method will find a termination argument. To our knowledge, the approach we propose is the most powerful technique of synthesis-based discovery of termination arguments for linear lasso programs and encompasses and enhances several methods having been proposed thus far. △ Less

Submitted 21 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Comments: Master's Thesis

Linear Ranking for Linear Lasso Programs

Authors: Matthias Heizmann, Jochen Hoenicke, Jan Leike, Andreas Podelski

Abstract: The general setting of this work is the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments. We consider a restricted class of programs called lasso programs. The termination argument for a lasso program is a pair of a ranking function and an invariant. We present the---to the best of our knowledge---first method to synthesize termination arguments for lasso programs that uses linear arithmetic. W… ▽ More The general setting of this work is the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments. We consider a restricted class of programs called lasso programs. The termination argument for a lasso program is a pair of a ranking function and an invariant. We present the---to the best of our knowledge---first method to synthesize termination arguments for lasso programs that uses linear arithmetic. We prove a completeness theorem. The completeness theorem establishes that, even though we use only linear (as opposed to non-linear) constraint solving, we are able to compute termination arguments in several interesting cases. The key to our method lies in a constraint transformation that replaces a disjunction by a sum. △ Less

Submitted 21 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Comments: ATVA 2013

Ranking Templates for Linear Loops

Authors: Jan Leike, Matthias Heizmann

Abstract: We present a new method for the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments for linear loop programs based on linear ranking templates. Linear ranking templates are parametrized, well-founded relations such that an assignment to the parameters gives rise to a ranking function. This approach generalizes existing methods and enables us to use templates for many different ranking functions wi… ▽ More We present a new method for the constraint-based synthesis of termination arguments for linear loop programs based on linear ranking templates. Linear ranking templates are parametrized, well-founded relations such that an assignment to the parameters gives rise to a ranking function. This approach generalizes existing methods and enables us to use templates for many different ranking functions with affine-linear components. We discuss templates for multiphase, piecewise, and lexicographic ranking functions. Because these ranking templates require both strict and non-strict inequalities, we use Motzkin's Transposition Theorem instead of Farkas Lemma to transform the generated $\exists\forall$-constraint into an $\exists$-constraint. △ Less

Submitted 21 January, 2014; originally announced January 2014.

Comments: TACAS 2014

Synthesis for Polynomial Lasso Programs

Authors: Jan Leike, Ashish Tiwari

Abstract: We present a method for the synthesis of polynomial lasso programs. These programs consist of a program stem, a set of transitions, and an exit condition, all in the form of algebraic assertions (conjunctions of polynomial equalities). Central to this approach is the discovery of non-linear (algebraic) loop invariants. We extend Sankaranarayanan, Sipma, and Manna's template-based approach and prov… ▽ More We present a method for the synthesis of polynomial lasso programs. These programs consist of a program stem, a set of transitions, and an exit condition, all in the form of algebraic assertions (conjunctions of polynomial equalities). Central to this approach is the discovery of non-linear (algebraic) loop invariants. We extend Sankaranarayanan, Sipma, and Manna's template-based approach and prove a completeness criterion. We perform program synthesis by generating a constraint whose solution is a synthesized program together with a loop invariant that proves the program's correctness. This constraint is non-linear and is passed to an SMT solver. Moreover, we can enforce the termination of the synthesized program with the support of test cases. △ Less

Submitted 16 November, 2013; originally announced November 2013.

Comments: Paper at VMCAI'14, including appendix