-
Is Model Collapse Inevitable? Breaking the Curse of Recursion by Accumulating Real and Synthetic Data
Authors:
Matthias Gerstgrasser,
Rylan Schaeffer,
Apratim Dey,
Rafael Rafailov,
Henry Sleight,
John Hughes,
Tomasz Korbak,
Rajashree Agrawal,
Dhruv Pai,
Andrey Gromov,
Daniel A. Roberts,
Diyi Yang,
David L. Donoho,
Sanmi Koyejo
Abstract:
The proliferation of generative models, combined with pretraining on web-scale data, raises a timely question: what happens when these models are trained on their own generated outputs? Recent investigations into model-data feedback loops proposed that such loops would lead to a phenomenon termed model collapse, under which performance progressively degrades with each model-data feedback iteration…
▽ More
The proliferation of generative models, combined with pretraining on web-scale data, raises a timely question: what happens when these models are trained on their own generated outputs? Recent investigations into model-data feedback loops proposed that such loops would lead to a phenomenon termed model collapse, under which performance progressively degrades with each model-data feedback iteration until fitted models become useless. However, those studies largely assumed that new data replace old data over time, where an arguably more realistic assumption is that data accumulate over time. In this paper, we ask: what effect does accumulating data have on model collapse? We empirically study this question by pretraining sequences of language models on text corpora. We confirm that replacing the original real data by each generation's synthetic data does indeed tend towards model collapse, then demonstrate that accumulating the successive generations of synthetic data alongside the original real data avoids model collapse; these results hold across a range of model sizes, architectures, and hyperparameters. We obtain similar results for deep generative models on other types of real data: diffusion models for molecule conformation generation and variational autoencoders for image generation. To understand why accumulating data can avoid model collapse, we use an analytically tractable framework introduced by prior work in which a sequence of linear models are fit to the previous models' outputs. Previous work used this framework to show that if data are replaced, the test error increases with the number of model-fitting iterations; we extend this argument to prove that if data instead accumulate, the test error has a finite upper bound independent of the number of iterations, meaning model collapse no longer occurs.
△ Less
Submitted 29 April, 2024; v1 submitted 1 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models
Authors:
Mrinank Sharma,
Meg Tong,
Tomasz Korbak,
David Duvenaud,
Amanda Askell,
Samuel R. Bowman,
Newton Cheng,
Esin Durmus,
Zac Hatfield-Dodds,
Scott R. Johnston,
Shauna Kravec,
Timothy Maxwell,
Sam McCandlish,
Kamal Ndousse,
Oliver Rausch,
Nicholas Schiefer,
Da Yan,
Miranda Zhang,
Ethan Perez
Abstract:
Human feedback is commonly utilized to finetune AI assistants. But human feedback may also encourage model responses that match user beliefs over truthful ones, a behaviour known as sycophancy. We investigate the prevalence of sycophancy in models whose finetuning procedure made use of human feedback, and the potential role of human preference judgments in such behavior. We first demonstrate that…
▽ More
Human feedback is commonly utilized to finetune AI assistants. But human feedback may also encourage model responses that match user beliefs over truthful ones, a behaviour known as sycophancy. We investigate the prevalence of sycophancy in models whose finetuning procedure made use of human feedback, and the potential role of human preference judgments in such behavior. We first demonstrate that five state-of-the-art AI assistants consistently exhibit sycophancy across four varied free-form text-generation tasks. To understand if human preferences drive this broadly observed behavior, we analyze existing human preference data. We find that when a response matches a user's views, it is more likely to be preferred. Moreover, both humans and preference models (PMs) prefer convincingly-written sycophantic responses over correct ones a non-negligible fraction of the time. Optimizing model outputs against PMs also sometimes sacrifices truthfulness in favor of sycophancy. Overall, our results indicate that sycophancy is a general behavior of state-of-the-art AI assistants, likely driven in part by human preference judgments favoring sycophantic responses.
△ Less
Submitted 10 May, 2025; v1 submitted 20 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Aligning Language Models with Preferences through f-divergence Minimization
Authors:
Dongyoung Go,
Tomasz Korbak,
Germán Kruszewski,
Jos Rozen,
Nahyeon Ryu,
Marc Dymetman
Abstract:
Aligning language models with preferences can be posed as approximating a target distribution representing some desired behavior. Existing approaches differ both in the functional form of the target distribution and the algorithm used to approximate it. For instance, Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) corresponds to minimizing a reverse KL from an implicit target distribution arisin…
▽ More
Aligning language models with preferences can be posed as approximating a target distribution representing some desired behavior. Existing approaches differ both in the functional form of the target distribution and the algorithm used to approximate it. For instance, Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) corresponds to minimizing a reverse KL from an implicit target distribution arising from a KL penalty in the objective. On the other hand, Generative Distributional Control (GDC) has an explicit target distribution and minimizes a forward KL from it using the Distributional Policy Gradient (DPG) algorithm. In this paper, we propose a new approach, f-DPG, which allows the use of any f-divergence to approximate any target distribution that can be evaluated. f-DPG unifies both frameworks (RLHF, GDC) and the approximation methods (DPG, RL with KL penalties). We show the practical benefits of various choices of divergence objectives and demonstrate that there is no universally optimal objective but that different divergences present different alignment and diversity trade-offs. We show that Jensen-Shannon divergence strikes a good balance between these objectives, and frequently outperforms forward KL divergence by a wide margin, leading to significant improvements over prior work. These distinguishing characteristics between divergences persist as the model size increases, highlighting the importance of selecting appropriate divergence objectives.
△ Less
Submitted 6 June, 2023; v1 submitted 16 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
-
On Reinforcement Learning and Distribution Matching for Fine-Tuning Language Models with no Catastrophic Forgetting
Authors:
Tomasz Korbak,
Hady Elsahar,
Germán Kruszewski,
Marc Dymetman
Abstract:
The availability of large pre-trained models is changing the landscape of Machine Learning research and practice, moving from a training-from-scratch to a fine-tuning paradigm. While in some applications the goal is to "nudge" the pre-trained distribution towards preferred outputs, in others it is to steer it towards a different distribution over the sample space. Two main paradigms have emerged t…
▽ More
The availability of large pre-trained models is changing the landscape of Machine Learning research and practice, moving from a training-from-scratch to a fine-tuning paradigm. While in some applications the goal is to "nudge" the pre-trained distribution towards preferred outputs, in others it is to steer it towards a different distribution over the sample space. Two main paradigms have emerged to tackle this challenge: Reward Maximization (RM) and, more recently, Distribution Matching (DM). RM applies standard Reinforcement Learning (RL) techniques, such as Policy Gradients, to gradually increase the reward signal. DM prescribes to first make explicit the target distribution that the model is fine-tuned to approximate. Here we explore the theoretical connections between the two paradigms, and show that methods such as KL-control developed for RM can also be construed as belonging to DM. We further observe that while DM differs from RM, it can suffer from similar training difficulties, such as high gradient variance. We leverage connections between the two paradigms to import the concept of baseline into DM methods. We empirically validate the benefits of adding a baseline on an array of controllable language generation tasks such as constraining topic, sentiment, and gender distributions in texts sampled from a language model. We observe superior performance in terms of constraint satisfaction, stability and sample efficiency.
△ Less
Submitted 14 November, 2022; v1 submitted 1 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
-
RL with KL penalties is better viewed as Bayesian inference
Authors:
Tomasz Korbak,
Ethan Perez,
Christopher L Buckley
Abstract:
Reinforcement learning (RL) is frequently employed in fine-tuning large language models (LMs), such as GPT-3, to penalize them for undesirable features of generated sequences, such as offensiveness, social bias, harmfulness or falsehood. The RL formulation involves treating the LM as a policy and updating it to maximise the expected value of a reward function which captures human preferences, such…
▽ More
Reinforcement learning (RL) is frequently employed in fine-tuning large language models (LMs), such as GPT-3, to penalize them for undesirable features of generated sequences, such as offensiveness, social bias, harmfulness or falsehood. The RL formulation involves treating the LM as a policy and updating it to maximise the expected value of a reward function which captures human preferences, such as non-offensiveness. In this paper, we analyze challenges associated with treating a language model as an RL policy and show how avoiding those challenges requires moving beyond the RL paradigm. We start by observing that the standard RL approach is flawed as an objective for fine-tuning LMs because it leads to distribution collapse: turning the LM into a degenerate distribution. Then, we analyze KL-regularised RL, a widely used recipe for fine-tuning LMs, which additionally constrains the fine-tuned LM to stay close to its original distribution in terms of Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence. We show that KL-regularised RL is equivalent to variational inference: approximating a Bayesian posterior which specifies how to update a prior LM to conform with evidence provided by the reward function. We argue that this Bayesian inference view of KL-regularised RL is more insightful than the typically employed RL perspective. The Bayesian inference view explains how KL-regularised RL avoids the distribution collapse problem and offers a first-principles derivation for its objective. While this objective happens to be equivalent to RL (with a particular choice of parametric reward), there exist other objectives for fine-tuning LMs which are no longer equivalent to RL. That observation leads to a more general point: RL is not an adequate formal framework for problems such as fine-tuning language models. These problems are best viewed as Bayesian inference: approximating a pre-defined target distribution.
△ Less
Submitted 21 October, 2022; v1 submitted 23 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
Exploiting Unsupervised Pre-training and Automated Feature Engineering for Low-resource Hate Speech Detection in Polish
Authors:
Renard Korzeniowski,
Rafał Rolczyński,
Przemysław Sadownik,
Tomasz Korbak,
Marcin Możejko
Abstract:
This paper presents our contribution to PolEval 2019 Task 6: Hate speech and bullying detection. We describe three parallel approaches that we followed: fine-tuning a pre-trained ULMFiT model to our classification task, fine-tuning a pre-trained BERT model to our classification task, and using the TPOT library to find the optimal pipeline. We present results achieved by these three tools and revie…
▽ More
This paper presents our contribution to PolEval 2019 Task 6: Hate speech and bullying detection. We describe three parallel approaches that we followed: fine-tuning a pre-trained ULMFiT model to our classification task, fine-tuning a pre-trained BERT model to our classification task, and using the TPOT library to find the optimal pipeline. We present results achieved by these three tools and review their advantages and disadvantages in terms of user experience. Our team placed second in subtask 2 with a shallow model found by TPOT: a~logistic regression classifier with non-trivial feature engineering.
△ Less
Submitted 17 June, 2019;
originally announced June 2019.
