Sometimes I am a Tree: Data Drives Unstable Hierarchical Generalization

Neural networks often favor shortcut heuristics based on surface-level patterns. As one example, language models (LMs) behave like n-gram models early in training. However, to correctly apply grammatical rules, LMs must rely on hierarchical syntactic representations instead of n-grams. In this work, we use cases studies of English grammar to explore how latent structure in training data drives models toward improved out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization.We then investigate how data composition can lead to inconsistent OOD behavior across random seeds and to unstable training dynamics. Our results show that models stabilize in their OOD behavior only when they fully commit to either a surface-level linear rule or a hierarchical rule. The hierarchical rule, furthermore, is induced by grammatically complex sequences with deep embedding structures, whereas the linear rule is induced by simpler sequences. When the data contains a mix of simple and complex examples, potential rules compete; each independent training run either stabilizes by committing to a single rule or remains unstable in its OOD behavior. These conditions lead `stable seeds' to cluster around simple rules, forming bimodal performance distributions across seeds. We also identify an exception to the relationship between stability and generalization: models which memorize patterns from low-diversity training data can overfit stably, with different rules for memorized and unmemorized patterns. Our findings emphasize the critical role of training data in shaping generalization patterns and how competition between data subsets contributes to inconsistent generalization outcomes across random seeds. Code is available at https://github.com/sunnytqin/concept_comp.git.

Mechanistic?

The rise of the term "mechanistic interpretability" has accompanied increasing interest in understanding neural models -- particularly language models. However, this jargon has also led to a fair amount of confusion. So, what does it mean to be "mechanistic"? We describe four uses of the term in interpretability research. The most narrow technical definition requires a claim of causality, while a broader technical definition allows for any exploration of a model's internals. However, the term also has a narrow cultural definition describing a cultural movement. To understand this semantic drift, we present a history of the NLP interpretability community and the formation of the separate, parallel "mechanistic" interpretability community. Finally, we discuss the broad cultural definition -- encompassing the entire field of interpretability -- and why the traditional NLP interpretability community has come to embrace it. We argue that the polysemy of "mechanistic" is the product of a critical divide within the interpretability community.

Fast Forwarding Low-Rank Training

Parameter efficient finetuning methods like low-rank adaptation (LoRA) aim to reduce the computational costs of finetuning pretrained Language Models (LMs). Enabled by these low-rank settings, we propose an even more efficient optimization strategy: Fast Forward, a simple and effective approach to accelerate large segments of training. In a Fast Forward stage, we repeat the most recent optimizer step until the loss stops improving on a tiny validation set. By alternating between regular optimization steps and Fast Forward stages, Fast Forward provides up to an 87\% reduction in FLOPs and up to an 81\% reduction in train time over standard SGD with Adam. We validate Fast Forward by finetuning various models on different tasks and demonstrate that it speeds up training without compromising model performance. Additionally, we analyze when and how to apply Fast Forward.

Benchmarks as Microscopes: A Call for Model Metrology

Modern language models (LMs) pose a new challenge in capability assessment. Static benchmarks inevitably saturate without providing confidence in the deployment tolerances of LM-based systems, but developers nonetheless claim that their models have generalized traits such as reasoning or open-domain language understanding based on these flawed metrics. The science and practice of LMs requires a new approach to benchmarking which measures specific capabilities with dynamic assessments. To be confident in our metrics, we need a new discipline of model metrology -- one which focuses on how to generate benchmarks that predict performance under deployment. Motivated by our evaluation criteria, we outline how building a community of model metrology practitioners -- one focused on building tools and studying how to measure system capabilities -- is the best way to meet these needs to and add clarity to the AI discussion.

ChatGPT Doesn't Trust Chargers Fans: Guardrail Sensitivity in Context

While the biases of language models in production are extensively documented, the biases of their guardrails have been neglected. This paper studies how contextual information about the user influences the likelihood of an LLM to refuse to execute a request. By generating user biographies that offer ideological and demographic information, we find a number of biases in guardrail sensitivity on GPT-3.5. Younger, female, and Asian-American personas are more likely to trigger a refusal guardrail when requesting censored or illegal information. Guardrails are also sycophantic, refusing to comply with requests for a political position the user is likely to disagree with. We find that certain identity groups and seemingly innocuous information, e.g., sports fandom, can elicit changes in guardrail sensitivity similar to direct statements of political ideology. For each demographic category and even for American football team fandom, we find that ChatGPT appears to infer a likely political ideology and modify guardrail behavior accordingly.

Recite, Reconstruct, Recollect: Memorization in LMs as a Multifaceted Phenomenon

Memorization in language models is typically treated as a homogenous phenomenon, neglecting the specifics of the memorized data. We instead model memorization as the effect of a set of complex factors that describe each sample and relate it to the model and corpus. To build intuition around these factors, we break memorization down into a taxonomy: recitation of highly duplicated sequences, reconstruction of inherently predictable sequences, and recollection of sequences that are neither. We demonstrate the usefulness of our taxonomy by using it to construct a predictive model for memorization. By analyzing dependencies and inspecting the weights of the predictive model, we find that different factors influence the likelihood of memorization differently depending on the taxonomic category.

Transcendence: Generative Models Can Outperform The Experts That Train Them

Generative models are trained with the simple objective of imitating the conditional probability distribution induced by the data they are trained on. Therefore, when trained on data generated by humans, we may not expect the artificial model to outperform the humans on their original objectives. In this work, we study the phenomenon of transcendence: when a generative model achieves capabilities that surpass the abilities of the experts generating its data. We demonstrate transcendence by training an autoregressive transformer to play chess from game transcripts, and show that the trained model can sometimes achieve better performance than all players in the dataset. We theoretically prove that transcendence is enabled by low-temperature sampling, and rigorously assess this experimentally. Finally, we discuss other sources of transcendence, laying the groundwork for future investigation of this phenomenon in a broader setting.

Knowing Your Nonlinearities: Shapley Interactions Reveal the Underlying Structure of Data

Measuring nonlinear feature interaction is an established approach to understanding complex patterns of attribution in many models. In this paper, we use Shapley Taylor interaction indices (STII) to analyze the impact of underlying data structure on model representations in a variety of modalities, tasks, and architectures. Considering linguistic structure in masked and auto-regressive language models (MLMs and ALMs), we find that STII increases within idiomatic expressions and that MLMs scale STII with syntactic distance, relying more on syntax in their nonlinear structure than ALMs do. Our speech model findings reflect the phonetic principal that the openness of the oral cavity determines how much a phoneme varies based on its context. Finally, we study image classifiers and illustrate that feature interactions intuitively reflect object boundaries. Our wide range of results illustrates the benefits of interdisciplinary work and domain expertise in interpretability research.

Towards out-of-distribution generalization in large-scale astronomical surveys: robust networks learn similar representations

The generalization of machine learning (ML) models to out-of-distribution (OOD) examples remains a key challenge in extracting information from upcoming astronomical surveys. Interpretability approaches are a natural way to gain insights into the OOD generalization problem. We use Centered Kernel Alignment (CKA), a similarity measure metric of neural network representations, to examine the relationship between representation similarity and performance of pre-trained Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) on the CAMELS Multifield Dataset. We find that when models are robust to a distribution shift, they produce substantially different representations across their layers on OOD data. However, when they fail to generalize, these representations change less from layer to layer on OOD data. We discuss the potential application of similarity representation in guiding model design, training strategy, and mitigating the OOD problem by incorporating CKA as an inductive bias during training.

Attribute Diversity Determines the Systematicity Gap in VQA

The degree to which neural networks can generalize to new combinations of familiar concepts, and the conditions under which they are able to do so, has long been an open question. In this work, we study the systematicity gap in visual question answering: the performance difference between reasoning on previously seen and unseen combinations of object attributes. To test, we introduce a novel diagnostic dataset, CLEVR-HOPE. We find that while increased quantity of training data does not reduce the systematicity gap, increased training data diversity of the attributes in the unseen combination does. In all, our experiments suggest that the more distinct attribute type combinations are seen during training, the more systematic we can expect the resulting model to be.