Abstract:The o1 model series is trained with large-scale reinforcement learning to reason using chain of thought. These advanced reasoning capabilities provide new avenues for improving the safety and robustness of our models. In particular, our models can reason about our safety policies in context when responding to potentially unsafe prompts, through deliberative alignment. This leads to state-of-the-art performance on certain benchmarks for risks such as generating illicit advice, choosing stereotyped responses, and succumbing to known jailbreaks. Training models to incorporate a chain of thought before answering has the potential to unlock substantial benefits, while also increasing potential risks that stem from heightened intelligence. Our results underscore the need for building robust alignment methods, extensively stress-testing their efficacy, and maintaining meticulous risk management protocols. This report outlines the safety work carried out for the OpenAI o1 and OpenAI o1-mini models, including safety evaluations, external red teaming, and Preparedness Framework evaluations.
Abstract:Much of the current work on reinforcement learning studies episodic settings, where the agent is reset between trials to an initial state distribution, often with well-shaped reward functions. Non-episodic settings, where the agent must learn through continuous interaction with the world without resets, and where the agent receives only delayed and sparse reward signals, is substantially more difficult, but arguably more realistic considering real-world environments do not present the learner with a convenient "reset mechanism" and easy reward shaping. In this paper, instead of studying algorithmic improvements that can address such non-episodic and sparse reward settings, we instead study the kinds of environment properties that can make learning under such conditions easier. Understanding how properties of the environment impact the performance of reinforcement learning agents can help us to structure our tasks in ways that make learning tractable. We first discuss what we term "environment shaping" -- modifications to the environment that provide an alternative to reward shaping, and may be easier to implement. We then discuss an even simpler property that we refer to as "dynamism," which describes the degree to which the environment changes independent of the agent's actions and can be measured by environment transition entropy. Surprisingly, we find that even this property can substantially alleviate the challenges associated with non-episodic RL in sparse reward settings. We provide an empirical evaluation on a set of new tasks focused on non-episodic learning with sparse rewards. Through this study, we hope to shift the focus of the community towards analyzing how properties of the environment can affect learning and the ultimate type of behavior that is learned via RL.
Abstract:Behavioral skills or policies for autonomous agents are conventionally learned from reward functions, via reinforcement learning, or from demonstrations, via imitation learning. However, both modes of task specification have their disadvantages: reward functions require manual engineering, while demonstrations require a human expert to be able to actually perform the task in order to generate the demonstration. Instruction following from natural language instructions provides an appealing alternative: in the same way that we can specify goals to other humans simply by speaking or writing, we would like to be able to specify tasks for our machines. However, a single instruction may be insufficient to fully communicate our intent or, even if it is, may be insufficient for an autonomous agent to actually understand how to perform the desired task. In this work, we propose an interactive formulation of the task specification problem, where iterative language corrections are provided to an autonomous agent, guiding it in acquiring the desired skill. Our proposed language-guided policy learning algorithm can integrate an instruction and a sequence of corrections to acquire new skills very quickly. In our experiments, we show that this method can enable a policy to follow instructions and corrections for simulated navigation and manipulation tasks, substantially outperforming direct, non-interactive instruction following.