Generalization Error of the Tilted Empirical Risk

The generalization error (risk) of a supervised statistical learning algorithm quantifies its prediction ability on previously unseen data. Inspired by exponential tilting, Li et al. (2021) proposed the tilted empirical risk as a non-linear risk metric for machine learning applications such as classification and regression problems. In this work, we examine the generalization error of the tilted empirical risk. In particular, we provide uniform and information-theoretic bounds on the tilted generalization error, defined as the difference between the population risk and the tilted empirical risk, with a convergence rate of $O(1/\sqrt{n})$ where $n$ is the number of training samples. Furthermore, we study the solution to the KL-regularized expected tilted empirical risk minimization problem and derive an upper bound on the expected tilted generalization error with a convergence rate of $O(1/n)$.

Inducing Group Fairness in LLM-Based Decisions

Prompting Large Language Models (LLMs) has created new and interesting means for classifying textual data. While evaluating and remediating group fairness is a well-studied problem in classifier fairness literature, some classical approaches (e.g., regularization) do not carry over, and some new opportunities arise (e.g., prompt-based remediation). We measure fairness of LLM-based classifiers on a toxicity classification task, and empirically show that prompt-based classifiers may lead to unfair decisions. We introduce several remediation techniques and benchmark their fairness and performance trade-offs. We hope our work encourages more research on group fairness in LLM-based classifiers.

Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deep

The safety alignment of current Large Language Models (LLMs) is vulnerable. Relatively simple attacks, or even benign fine-tuning, can jailbreak aligned models. We argue that many of these vulnerabilities are related to a shared underlying issue: safety alignment can take shortcuts, wherein the alignment adapts a model's generative distribution primarily over only its very first few output tokens. We refer to this issue as shallow safety alignment. In this paper, we present case studies to explain why shallow safety alignment can exist and provide evidence that current aligned LLMs are subject to this issue. We also show how these findings help explain multiple recently discovered vulnerabilities in LLMs, including the susceptibility to adversarial suffix attacks, prefilling attacks, decoding parameter attacks, and fine-tuning attacks. Importantly, we discuss how this consolidated notion of shallow safety alignment sheds light on promising research directions for mitigating these vulnerabilities. For instance, we show that deepening the safety alignment beyond just the first few tokens can often meaningfully improve robustness against some common exploits. Finally, we design a regularized finetuning objective that makes the safety alignment more persistent against fine-tuning attacks by constraining updates on initial tokens. Overall, we advocate that future safety alignment should be made more than just a few tokens deep.

Robust Preference Optimization through Reward Model Distillation

Language model (LM) post-training (or alignment) involves maximizing a reward function that is derived from preference annotations. Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) is a popular offline alignment method that trains a policy directly on preference data without the need to train a reward model or apply reinforcement learning. However, typical preference datasets have only a single, or at most a few, annotation per preference pair, which causes DPO to overconfidently assign rewards that trend towards infinite magnitude. This frequently leads to degenerate policies, sometimes causing even the probabilities of the preferred generations to go to zero. In this work, we analyze this phenomenon and propose distillation to get a better proxy for the true preference distribution over generation pairs: we train the LM to produce probabilities that match the distribution induced by a reward model trained on the preference data. Moreover, to account for uncertainty in the reward model we are distilling from, we optimize against a family of reward models that, as a whole, is likely to include at least one reasonable proxy for the preference distribution. Our results show that distilling from such a family of reward models leads to improved robustness to distribution shift in preference annotations, while preserving the simple supervised nature of DPO.

Mitigating Object Hallucination via Data Augmented Contrastive Tuning

Despite their remarkable progress, Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) tend to hallucinate factually inaccurate information. In this work, we address object hallucinations in MLLMs, where information is offered about an object that is not present in the model input. We introduce a contrastive tuning method that can be applied to a pretrained off-the-shelf MLLM for mitigating hallucinations while preserving its general vision-language capabilities. For a given factual token, we create a hallucinated token through generative data augmentation by selectively altering the ground-truth information. The proposed contrastive tuning is applied at the token level to improve the relative likelihood of the factual token compared to the hallucinated one. Our thorough evaluation confirms the effectiveness of contrastive tuning in mitigating hallucination. Moreover, the proposed contrastive tuning is simple, fast, and requires minimal training with no additional overhead at inference.

Reuse Your Rewards: Reward Model Transfer for Zero-Shot Cross-Lingual Alignment

Aligning language models (LMs) based on human-annotated preference data is a crucial step in obtaining practical and performant LM-based systems. However, multilingual human preference data are difficult to obtain at scale, making it challenging to extend this framework to diverse languages. In this work, we evaluate a simple approach for zero-shot cross-lingual alignment, where a reward model is trained on preference data in one source language and directly applied to other target languages. On summarization and open-ended dialog generation, we show that this method is consistently successful under comprehensive evaluation settings, including human evaluation: cross-lingually aligned models are preferred by humans over unaligned models on up to >70% of evaluation instances. We moreover find that a different-language reward model sometimes yields better aligned models than a same-language reward model. We also identify best practices when there is no language-specific data for even supervised finetuning, another component in alignment.

Asymptotics of Language Model Alignment

Let $p$ denote a generative language model. Let $r$ denote a reward model that returns a scalar that captures the degree at which a draw from $p$ is preferred. The goal of language model alignment is to alter $p$ to a new distribution $\phi$ that results in a higher expected reward while keeping $\phi$ close to $p.$ A popular alignment method is the KL-constrained reinforcement learning (RL), which chooses a distribution $\phi_\Delta$ that maximizes $E_{\phi_{\Delta}} r(y)$ subject to a relative entropy constraint $KL(\phi_\Delta || p) \leq \Delta.$ Another simple alignment method is best-of-$N$, where $N$ samples are drawn from $p$ and one with highest reward is selected. In this paper, we offer a closed-form characterization of the optimal KL-constrained RL solution. We demonstrate that any alignment method that achieves a comparable trade-off between KL divergence and reward must approximate the optimal KL-constrained RL solution in terms of relative entropy. To further analyze the properties of alignment methods, we introduce two simplifying assumptions: we let the language model be memoryless, and the reward model be linear. Although these assumptions may not reflect complex real-world scenarios, they enable a precise characterization of the asymptotic behavior of both the best-of-$N$ alignment, and the KL-constrained RL method, in terms of information-theoretic quantities. We prove that the reward of the optimal KL-constrained RL solution satisfies a large deviation principle, and we fully characterize its rate function. We also show that the rate of growth of the scaled cumulants of the reward is characterized by a proper Renyi cross entropy. Finally, we show that best-of-$N$ is asymptotically equivalent to KL-constrained RL solution by proving that their expected rewards are asymptotically equal, and concluding that the two distributions must be close in KL divergence.

Optimal Block-Level Draft Verification for Accelerating Speculative Decoding

Speculative decoding has shown to be an effective method for lossless acceleration of large language models (LLMs) during inference. In each iteration, the algorithm first uses a smaller model to draft a block of tokens. The tokens are then verified by the large model in parallel and only a subset of tokens will be kept to guarantee that the final output follows the distribution of the large model. In all of the prior speculative decoding works, the draft verification is performed token-by-token independently. In this work, we propose a better draft verification algorithm that provides additional wall-clock speedup without incurring additional computation cost and draft tokens. We first formulate the draft verification step as a block-level optimal transport problem. The block-level formulation allows us to consider a wider range of draft verification algorithms and obtain a higher number of accepted tokens in expectation in one draft block. We propose a verification algorithm that achieves the optimal accepted length for the block-level transport problem. We empirically evaluate our proposed block-level verification algorithm in a wide range of tasks and datasets, and observe consistent improvements in wall-clock speedup when compared to token-level verification algorithm. To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first to establish improvement over speculative decoding through a better draft verification algorithm.

Gradient-Based Language Model Red Teaming

Red teaming is a common strategy for identifying weaknesses in generative language models (LMs), where adversarial prompts are produced that trigger an LM to generate unsafe responses. Red teaming is instrumental for both model alignment and evaluation, but is labor-intensive and difficult to scale when done by humans. In this paper, we present Gradient-Based Red Teaming (GBRT), a red teaming method for automatically generating diverse prompts that are likely to cause an LM to output unsafe responses. GBRT is a form of prompt learning, trained by scoring an LM response with a safety classifier and then backpropagating through the frozen safety classifier and LM to update the prompt. To improve the coherence of input prompts, we introduce two variants that add a realism loss and fine-tune a pretrained model to generate the prompts instead of learning the prompts directly. Our experiments show that GBRT is more effective at finding prompts that trigger an LM to generate unsafe responses than a strong reinforcement learning-based red teaming approach, and succeeds even when the LM has been fine-tuned to produce safer outputs.

Theoretical guarantees on the best-of-n alignment policy

A simple and effective method for the alignment of generative models is the best-of-$n$ policy, where $n$ samples are drawn from a base policy, and ranked based on a reward function, and the highest ranking one is selected. A commonly used analytical expression in the literature claims that the KL divergence between the best-of-$n$ policy and the base policy is equal to $\log (n) - (n-1)/n.$ We disprove the validity of this claim, and show that it is an upper bound on the actual KL divergence. We also explore the tightness of this upper bound in different regimes. Finally, we propose a new estimator for the KL divergence and empirically show that it provides a tight approximation through a few examples.