Unexpected Benefits of Self-Modeling in Neural Systems

Self-models have been a topic of great interest for decades in studies of human cognition and more recently in machine learning. Yet what benefits do self-models confer? Here we show that when artificial networks learn to predict their internal states as an auxiliary task, they change in a fundamental way. To better perform the self-model task, the network learns to make itself simpler, more regularized, more parameter-efficient, and therefore more amenable to being predictively modeled. To test the hypothesis of self-regularizing through self-modeling, we used a range of network architectures performing three classification tasks across two modalities. In all cases, adding self-modeling caused a significant reduction in network complexity. The reduction was observed in two ways. First, the distribution of weights was narrower when self-modeling was present. Second, a measure of network complexity, the real log canonical threshold (RLCT), was smaller when self-modeling was present. Not only were measures of complexity reduced, but the reduction became more pronounced as greater training weight was placed on the auxiliary task of self-modeling. These results strongly support the hypothesis that self-modeling is more than simply a network learning to predict itself. The learning has a restructuring effect, reducing complexity and increasing parameter efficiency. This self-regularization may help explain some of the benefits of self-models reported in recent machine learning literature, as well as the adaptive value of self-models to biological systems. In particular, these findings may shed light on the possible interaction between the ability to model oneself and the ability to be more easily modeled by others in a social or cooperative context.

Rethinking harmless refusals when fine-tuning foundation models

In this paper, we investigate the degree to which fine-tuning in Large Language Models (LLMs) effectively mitigates versus merely conceals undesirable behavior. Through the lens of semi-realistic role-playing exercises designed to elicit such behaviors, we explore the response dynamics of LLMs post fine-tuning interventions. Our methodology involves prompting models for Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning and analyzing the coherence between the reasoning traces and the resultant outputs. Notably, we identify a pervasive phenomenon we term \emph{reason-based deception}, where models either stop producing reasoning traces or produce seemingly ethical reasoning traces that belie the unethical nature of their final outputs. We further examine the efficacy of response strategies (polite refusal versus explicit rebuttal) in curbing the occurrence of undesired behavior in subsequent outputs of multi-turn interactions. Our findings reveal that explicit rebuttals significantly outperform polite refusals in preventing the continuation of undesired outputs and nearly eliminate reason-based deception, challenging current practices in model fine-tuning. Accordingly, the two key contributions of this paper are (1) defining and studying reason-based deception, a new type of hidden behavior, and (2) demonstrating that rebuttals provide a more robust response model to harmful requests than refusals, thereby highlighting the need to reconsider the response strategies in fine-tuning approaches.