On the Limits of Language Generation: Trade-Offs Between Hallucination and Mode Collapse

Specifying all desirable properties of a language model is challenging, but certain requirements seem essential. Given samples from an unknown language, the trained model should produce valid strings not seen in training and be expressive enough to capture the language's full richness. Otherwise, outputting invalid strings constitutes "hallucination," and failing to capture the full range leads to "mode collapse." We ask if a language model can meet both requirements. We investigate this within a statistical language generation setting building on Gold and Angluin. Here, the model receives random samples from a distribution over an unknown language K, which belongs to a possibly infinite collection of languages. The goal is to generate unseen strings from K. We say the model generates from K with consistency and breadth if, as training size increases, its output converges to all unseen strings in K. Kleinberg and Mullainathan [KM24] asked if consistency and breadth in language generation are possible. We answer this negatively: for a large class of language models, including next-token prediction models, this is impossible for most collections of candidate languages. This contrasts with [KM24]'s result, showing consistent generation without breadth is possible for any countable collection of languages. Our finding highlights that generation with breadth fundamentally differs from generation without breadth. As a byproduct, we establish near-tight bounds on the number of samples needed for generation with or without breadth. Finally, our results offer hope: consistent generation with breadth is achievable for any countable collection of languages when negative examples (strings outside K) are available alongside positive ones. This suggests that post-training feedback, which encodes negative examples, can be crucial in reducing hallucinations while limiting mode collapse.

Smaller Confidence Intervals From IPW Estimators via Data-Dependent Coarsening

Inverse propensity-score weighted (IPW) estimators are prevalent in causal inference for estimating average treatment effects in observational studies. Under unconfoundedness, given accurate propensity scores and $n$ samples, the size of confidence intervals of IPW estimators scales down with $n$, and, several of their variants improve the rate of scaling. However, neither IPW estimators nor their variants are robust to inaccuracies: even if a single covariate has an $\varepsilon>0$ additive error in the propensity score, the size of confidence intervals of these estimators can increase arbitrarily. Moreover, even without errors, the rate with which the confidence intervals of these estimators go to zero with $n$ can be arbitrarily slow in the presence of extreme propensity scores (those close to 0 or 1). We introduce a family of Coarse IPW (CIPW) estimators that captures existing IPW estimators and their variants. Each CIPW estimator is an IPW estimator on a coarsened covariate space, where certain covariates are merged. Under mild assumptions, e.g., Lipschitzness in expected outcomes and sparsity of extreme propensity scores, we give an efficient algorithm to find a robust estimator: given $\varepsilon$-inaccurate propensity scores and $n$ samples, its confidence interval size scales with $\varepsilon+1/\sqrt{n}$. In contrast, under the same assumptions, existing estimators' confidence interval sizes are $\Omega(1)$ irrespective of $\varepsilon$ and $n$. Crucially, our estimator is data-dependent and we show that no data-independent CIPW estimator can be robust to inaccuracies.

Efficient Statistics With Unknown Truncation, Polynomial Time Algorithms, Beyond Gaussians

We study the estimation of distributional parameters when samples are shown only if they fall in some unknown set $S \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$. Kontonis, Tzamos, and Zampetakis (FOCS'19) gave a $d^{\mathrm{poly}(1/\varepsilon)}$ time algorithm for finding $\varepsilon$-accurate parameters for the special case of Gaussian distributions with diagonal covariance matrix. Recently, Diakonikolas, Kane, Pittas, and Zarifis (COLT'24) showed that this exponential dependence on $1/\varepsilon$ is necessary even when $S$ belongs to some well-behaved classes. These works leave the following open problems which we address in this work: Can we estimate the parameters of any Gaussian or even extend beyond Gaussians? Can we design $\mathrm{poly}(d/\varepsilon)$ time algorithms when $S$ is a simple set such as a halfspace? We make progress on both of these questions by providing the following results: 1. Toward the first question, we give a $d^{\mathrm{poly}(\ell/\varepsilon)}$ time algorithm for any exponential family that satisfies some structural assumptions and any unknown set $S$ that is $\varepsilon$-approximable by degree-$\ell$ polynomials. This result has two important applications: 1a) The first algorithm for estimating arbitrary Gaussian distributions from samples truncated to an unknown $S$; and 1b) The first algorithm for linear regression with unknown truncation and Gaussian features. 2. To address the second question, we provide an algorithm with runtime $\mathrm{poly}(d/\varepsilon)$ that works for a set of exponential families (containing all Gaussians) when $S$ is a halfspace or an axis-aligned rectangle. Along the way, we develop tools that may be of independent interest, including, a reduction from PAC learning with positive and unlabeled samples to PAC learning with positive and negative samples that is robust to certain covariate shifts.

Fair Classification with Partial Feedback: An Exploration-Based Data-Collection Approach

In many predictive contexts (e.g., credit lending), true outcomes are only observed for samples that were positively classified in the past. These past observations, in turn, form training datasets for classifiers that make future predictions. However, such training datasets lack information about the outcomes of samples that were (incorrectly) negatively classified in the past and can lead to erroneous classifiers. We present an approach that trains a classifier using available data and comes with a family of exploration strategies to collect outcome data about subpopulations that otherwise would have been ignored. For any exploration strategy, the approach comes with guarantees that (1) all sub-populations are explored, (2) the fraction of false positives is bounded, and (3) the trained classifier converges to a "desired" classifier. The right exploration strategy is context-dependent; it can be chosen to improve learning guarantees and encode context-specific group fairness properties. Evaluation on real-world datasets shows that this approach consistently boosts the quality of collected outcome data and improves the fraction of true positives for all groups, with only a small reduction in predictive utility.

Tree of Attacks: Jailbreaking Black-Box LLMs Automatically

While Large Language Models (LLMs) display versatile functionality, they continue to generate harmful, biased, and toxic content, as demonstrated by the prevalence of human-designed jailbreaks. In this work, we present Tree of Attacks with Pruning (TAP), an automated method for generating jailbreaks that only requires black-box access to the target LLM. TAP utilizes an LLM to iteratively refine candidate (attack) prompts using tree-of-thoughts reasoning until one of the generated prompts jailbreaks the target. Crucially, before sending prompts to the target, TAP assesses them and prunes the ones unlikely to result in jailbreaks. Using tree-of-thought reasoning allows TAP to navigate a large search space of prompts and pruning reduces the total number of queries sent to the target. In empirical evaluations, we observe that TAP generates prompts that jailbreak state-of-the-art LLMs (including GPT4 and GPT4-Turbo) for more than 80% of the prompts using only a small number of queries. This significantly improves upon the previous state-of-the-art black-box method for generating jailbreaks.

Bias in Evaluation Processes: An Optimization-Based Model

Biases with respect to socially-salient attributes of individuals have been well documented in evaluation processes used in settings such as admissions and hiring. We view such an evaluation process as a transformation of a distribution of the true utility of an individual for a task to an observed distribution and model it as a solution to a loss minimization problem subject to an information constraint. Our model has two parameters that have been identified as factors leading to biases: the resource-information trade-off parameter in the information constraint and the risk-averseness parameter in the loss function. We characterize the distributions that arise from our model and study the effect of the parameters on the observed distribution. The outputs of our model enrich the class of distributions that can be used to capture variation across groups in the observed evaluations. We empirically validate our model by fitting real-world datasets and use it to study the effect of interventions in a downstream selection task. These results contribute to an understanding of the emergence of bias in evaluation processes and provide tools to guide the deployment of interventions to mitigate biases.

Sampling Individually-Fair Rankings that are Always Group Fair

Rankings on online platforms help their end-users find the relevant information -- people, news, media, and products -- quickly. Fair ranking tasks, which ask to rank a set of items to maximize utility subject to satisfying group-fairness constraints, have gained significant interest in the Algorithmic Fairness, Information Retrieval, and Machine Learning literature. Recent works, however, identify uncertainty in the utilities of items as a primary cause of unfairness and propose introducing randomness in the output. This randomness is carefully chosen to guarantee an adequate representation of each item (while accounting for the uncertainty). However, due to this randomness, the output rankings may violate group fairness constraints. We give an efficient algorithm that samples rankings from an individually-fair distribution while ensuring that every output ranking is group fair. The expected utility of the output ranking is at least $\alpha$ times the utility of the optimal fair solution. Here, $\alpha$ depends on the utilities, position-discounts, and constraints -- it approaches 1 as the range of utilities or the position-discounts shrinks, or when utilities satisfy distributional assumptions. Empirically, we observe that our algorithm achieves individual and group fairness and that Pareto dominates the state-of-the-art baselines.

Subset Selection Based On Multiple Rankings in the Presence of Bias: Effectiveness of Fairness Constraints for Multiwinner Voting Score Functions

We consider the problem of subset selection where one is given multiple rankings of items and the goal is to select the highest ``quality'' subset. Score functions from the multiwinner voting literature have been used to aggregate rankings into quality scores for subsets. We study this setting of subset selection problems when, in addition, rankings may contain systemic or unconscious biases toward a group of items. For a general model of input rankings and biases, we show that requiring the selected subset to satisfy group fairness constraints can improve the quality of the selection with respect to unbiased rankings. Importantly, we show that for fairness constraints to be effective, different multiwinner score functions may require a drastically different number of rankings: While for some functions, fairness constraints need an exponential number of rankings to recover a close-to-optimal solution, for others, this dependency is only polynomial. This result relies on a novel notion of ``smoothness'' of submodular functions in this setting that quantifies how well a function can ``correctly'' assess the quality of items in the presence of bias. The results in this paper can be used to guide the choice of multiwinner score functions for the subset selection setting considered here; we additionally provide a tool to empirically enable this.

Maximizing Submodular Functions for Recommendation in the Presence of Biases

Subset selection tasks, arise in recommendation systems and search engines and ask to select a subset of items that maximize the value for the user. The values of subsets often display diminishing returns, and hence, submodular functions have been used to model them. If the inputs defining the submodular function are known, then existing algorithms can be used. In many applications, however, inputs have been observed to have social biases that reduce the utility of the output subset. Hence, interventions to improve the utility are desired. Prior works focus on maximizing linear functions -- a special case of submodular functions -- and show that fairness constraint-based interventions can not only ensure proportional representation but also achieve near-optimal utility in the presence of biases. We study the maximization of a family of submodular functions that capture functions arising in the aforementioned applications. Our first result is that, unlike linear functions, constraint-based interventions cannot guarantee any constant fraction of the optimal utility for this family of submodular functions. Our second result is an algorithm for submodular maximization. The algorithm provably outputs subsets that have near-optimal utility for this family under mild assumptions and that proportionally represent items from each group. In empirical evaluation, with both synthetic and real-world data, we observe that this algorithm improves the utility of the output subset for this family of submodular functions over baselines.

Fair Ranking with Noisy Protected Attributes

The fair-ranking problem, which asks to rank a given set of items to maximize utility subject to group fairness constraints, has received attention in the fairness, information retrieval, and machine learning literature. Recent works, however, observe that errors in socially-salient (including protected) attributes of items can significantly undermine fairness guarantees of existing fair-ranking algorithms and raise the problem of mitigating the effect of such errors. We study the fair-ranking problem under a model where socially-salient attributes of items are randomly and independently perturbed. We present a fair-ranking framework that incorporates group fairness requirements along with probabilistic information about perturbations in socially-salient attributes. We provide provable guarantees on the fairness and utility attainable by our framework and show that it is information-theoretically impossible to significantly beat these guarantees. Our framework works for multiple non-disjoint attributes and a general class of fairness constraints that includes proportional and equal representation. Empirically, we observe that, compared to baselines, our algorithm outputs rankings with higher fairness, and has a similar or better fairness-utility trade-off compared to baselines.