Princeton University
Abstract:Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) is a popular technique for parameter-efficient fine-tuning of Large Language Models (LLMs). We study how different LoRA modules can be merged to achieve skill composition -- testing the performance of the merged model on a target task that involves combining multiple skills, each skill coming from a single LoRA. This setup is favorable when it is difficult to obtain training data for the target task and when it can be decomposed into multiple skills. First, we identify practically occurring use-cases that can be studied under the realm of skill composition, e.g. solving hard math-word problems with code, creating a bot to answer questions on proprietary manuals or about domain-specialized corpora. Our main contribution is to show that concatenation of LoRAs (CAT), which optimally averages LoRAs that were individually trained on different skills, outperforms existing model- and data- merging techniques; for instance on math-word problems, CAT beats these methods by an average of 43% and 12% respectively. Thus, this paper advocates model merging as an efficient way to solve compositional tasks and underscores CAT as a simple, compute-friendly and effective procedure. To our knowledge, this is the first work demonstrating the superiority of model merging over data mixing for binary skill composition tasks.
Abstract:As premodern texts are passed down over centuries, errors inevitably accrue. These errors can be challenging to identify, as some have survived undetected for so long precisely because they are so elusive. While prior work has evaluated error detection methods on artificially-generated errors, we introduce the first dataset of real errors in premodern Greek, enabling the evaluation of error detection methods on errors that genuinely accumulated at some stage in the centuries-long copying process. To create this dataset, we use metrics derived from BERT conditionals to sample 1,000 words more likely to contain errors, which are then annotated and labeled by a domain expert as errors or not. We then propose and evaluate new error detection methods and find that our discriminator-based detector outperforms all other methods, improving the true positive rate for classifying real errors by 5%. We additionally observe that scribal errors are more difficult to detect than print or digitization errors. Our dataset enables the evaluation of error detection methods on real errors in premodern texts for the first time, providing a benchmark for developing more effective error detection algorithms to assist scholars in restoring premodern works.
Abstract:Although language model (LM) agents are demonstrating growing potential in many domains, their success in cybersecurity has been limited due to simplistic design and the lack of fundamental features for this domain. We present EnIGMA, an LM agent for autonomously solving Capture The Flag (CTF) challenges. EnIGMA introduces new Agent-Computer Interfaces (ACIs) to improve the success rate on CTF challenges. We establish the novel Interactive Agent Tool concept, which enables LM agents to run interactive command-line utilities essential for these challenges. Empirical analysis of EnIGMA on over 350 CTF challenges from three different benchmarks indicates that providing a robust set of new tools with demonstration of their usage helps the LM solve complex problems and achieves state-of-the-art results on the NYU CTF and Intercode-CTF benchmarks. Finally, we discuss insights on ACI design and agent behavior on cybersecurity tasks that highlight the need to adapt real-world tools for LM agents.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at generating human-like dialogues and comprehending text. However, understanding the subtleties of complex exchanges in language remains a challenge. We propose a bootstrapping framework that leverages self-generated feedback to enhance LLM reasoning capabilities for lie detection. The framework consists of three stages: suggestion, feedback collection, and modification. In the suggestion stage, a cost-effective language model generates initial predictions based on game state and dialogue. The feedback-collection stage involves a language model providing feedback on these predictions. In the modification stage, a more advanced language model refines the initial predictions using the auto-generated feedback. We investigate the application of the proposed framework for detecting betrayal and deception in Diplomacy games, and compare it with feedback from professional human players. The LLM-generated feedback exhibits superior quality and significantly enhances the performance of the model. Our approach achieves a 39% improvement over the zero-shot baseline in lying-F1 without the need for any training data, rivaling state-of-the-art supervised learning results.
Abstract:We present ShieldGemma, a comprehensive suite of LLM-based safety content moderation models built upon Gemma2. These models provide robust, state-of-the-art predictions of safety risks across key harm types (sexually explicit, dangerous content, harassment, hate speech) in both user input and LLM-generated output. By evaluating on both public and internal benchmarks, we demonstrate superior performance compared to existing models, such as Llama Guard (+10.8\% AU-PRC on public benchmarks) and WildCard (+4.3\%). Additionally, we present a novel LLM-based data curation pipeline, adaptable to a variety of safety-related tasks and beyond. We have shown strong generalization performance for model trained mainly on synthetic data. By releasing ShieldGemma, we provide a valuable resource to the research community, advancing LLM safety and enabling the creation of more effective content moderation solutions for developers.
Abstract:Persona agents, which are LLM agents that act according to an assigned persona, have demonstrated impressive contextual response capabilities across various applications. These persona agents offer significant enhancements across diverse sectors, such as education, healthcare, and entertainment, where model developers can align agent responses to different user requirements thereby broadening the scope of agent applications. However, evaluating persona agent performance is incredibly challenging due to the complexity of assessing persona adherence in free-form interactions across various environments that are relevant to each persona agent. We introduce PersonaGym, the first dynamic evaluation framework for assessing persona agents, and PersonaScore, the first automated human-aligned metric grounded in decision theory for comprehensive large-scale evaluation of persona agents. Our evaluation of 6 open and closed-source LLMs, using a benchmark encompassing 200 personas and 10,000 questions, reveals significant opportunities for advancement in persona agent capabilities across state-of-the-art models. For example, Claude 3.5 Sonnet only has a 2.97% relative improvement in PersonaScore than GPT 3.5 despite being a much more advanced model. Importantly, we find that increased model size and complexity do not necessarily imply enhanced persona agent capabilities thereby highlighting the pressing need for algorithmic and architectural invention towards faithful and performant persona agents.
Abstract:Existing benchmarks do not test language agents on their interaction with human users or ability to follow domain-specific rules, both of which are vital for deploying them in real world applications. We propose $\tau$-bench, a benchmark emulating dynamic conversations between a user (simulated by language models) and a language agent provided with domain-specific API tools and policy guidelines. We employ an efficient and faithful evaluation process that compares the database state at the end of a conversation with the annotated goal state. We also propose a new metric (pass^k) to evaluate the reliability of agent behavior over multiple trials. Our experiments show that even state-of-the-art function calling agents (like gpt-4o) succeed on <50% of the tasks, and are quite inconsistent (pass^8 <25% in retail). Our findings point to the need for methods that can improve the ability of agents to act consistently and follow rules reliably.
Abstract:Computing olympiads contain some of the most challenging problems for humans, requiring complex algorithmic reasoning, puzzle solving, in addition to generating efficient code. However, it has been understudied as a domain to evaluate language models (LMs). In this paper, we introduce the USACO benchmark with 307 problems from the USA Computing Olympiad, along with high-quality unit tests, reference code, and official analyses for each problem. These resources enable us to construct and test a range of LM inference methods for competitive programming for the first time. We find GPT-4 only achieves a 8.7% pass@1 accuracy with zero-shot chain-of-thought prompting, and our best inference method improves it to 20.2% using a combination of self-reflection and retrieval over episodic knowledge. However, this is far from solving the benchmark. To better understand the remaining challenges, we design a novel human-in-the-loop study and surprisingly find that a small number of targeted hints enable GPT-4 to solve 13 out of 15 problems previously unsolvable by any model and method. Our benchmark, baseline methods, quantitative results, and qualitative analysis serve as an initial step toward LMs with grounded, creative, and algorithmic reasoning.
Abstract:State-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) have become indispensable tools for various tasks. However, training LLMs to serve as effective assistants for humans requires careful consideration. A promising approach is reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), which leverages human feedback to update the model in accordance with human preferences and mitigate issues like toxicity and hallucinations. Yet, an understanding of RLHF for LLMs is largely entangled with initial design choices that popularized the method and current research focuses on augmenting those choices rather than fundamentally improving the framework. In this paper, we analyze RLHF through the lens of reinforcement learning principles to develop an understanding of its fundamentals, dedicating substantial focus to the core component of RLHF -- the reward model. Our study investigates modeling choices, caveats of function approximation, and their implications on RLHF training algorithms, highlighting the underlying assumptions made about the expressivity of reward. Our analysis improves the understanding of the role of reward models and methods for their training, concurrently revealing limitations of the current methodology. We characterize these limitations, including incorrect generalization, model misspecification, and the sparsity of feedback, along with their impact on the performance of a language model. The discussion and analysis are substantiated by a categorical review of current literature, serving as a reference for researchers and practitioners to understand the challenges of RLHF and build upon existing efforts.
Abstract:Installing probabilistic world models into artificial agents opens an efficient channel for humans to communicate with and control these agents. In addition to updating agent policies, humans can modify their internal world models in order to influence their decisions. The challenge, however, is that currently existing world models are difficult for humans to adapt because they lack a natural communication interface. Aimed at addressing this shortcoming, we develop Language-Guided World Models (LWMs), which can capture environment dynamics by reading language descriptions. These models enhance agent communication efficiency, allowing humans to simultaneously alter their behavior on multiple tasks with concise language feedback. They also enable agents to self-learn from texts originally written to instruct humans. To facilitate the development of LWMs, we design a challenging benchmark based on the game of MESSENGER (Hanjie et al., 2021), requiring compositional generalization to new language descriptions and environment dynamics. Our experiments reveal that the current state-of-the-art Transformer architecture performs poorly on this benchmark, motivating us to design a more robust architecture. To showcase the practicality of our proposed LWMs, we simulate a scenario where these models augment the interpretability and safety of an agent by enabling it to generate and discuss plans with a human before execution. By effectively incorporating language feedback on the plan, the models boost the agent performance in the real environment by up to three times without collecting any interactive experiences in this environment.