-
Protecting against simultaneous data poisoning attacks
Authors:
Neel Alex,
Shoaib Ahmed Siddiqui,
Amartya Sanyal,
David Krueger
Abstract:
Current backdoor defense methods are evaluated against a single attack at a time. This is unrealistic, as powerful machine learning systems are trained on large datasets scraped from the internet, which may be attacked multiple times by one or more attackers. We demonstrate that simultaneously executed data poisoning attacks can effectively install multiple backdoors in a single model without subs…
▽ More
Current backdoor defense methods are evaluated against a single attack at a time. This is unrealistic, as powerful machine learning systems are trained on large datasets scraped from the internet, which may be attacked multiple times by one or more attackers. We demonstrate that simultaneously executed data poisoning attacks can effectively install multiple backdoors in a single model without substantially degrading clean accuracy. Furthermore, we show that existing backdoor defense methods do not effectively prevent attacks in this setting. Finally, we leverage insights into the nature of backdoor attacks to develop a new defense, BaDLoss, that is effective in the multi-attack setting. With minimal clean accuracy degradation, BaDLoss attains an average attack success rate in the multi-attack setting of 7.98% in CIFAR-10 and 10.29% in GTSRB, compared to the average of other defenses at 64.48% and 84.28% respectively.
△ Less
Submitted 23 August, 2024;
originally announced August 2024.
-
A deeper look at depth pruning of LLMs
Authors:
Shoaib Ahmed Siddiqui,
Xin Dong,
Greg Heinrich,
Thomas Breuel,
Jan Kautz,
David Krueger,
Pavlo Molchanov
Abstract:
Large Language Models (LLMs) are not only resource-intensive to train but even more costly to deploy in production. Therefore, recent work has attempted to prune blocks of LLMs based on cheap proxies for estimating block importance, effectively removing 10% of blocks in well-trained LLaMa-2 and Mistral 7b models without any significant degradation of downstream metrics. In this paper, we explore d…
▽ More
Large Language Models (LLMs) are not only resource-intensive to train but even more costly to deploy in production. Therefore, recent work has attempted to prune blocks of LLMs based on cheap proxies for estimating block importance, effectively removing 10% of blocks in well-trained LLaMa-2 and Mistral 7b models without any significant degradation of downstream metrics. In this paper, we explore different block importance metrics by considering adaptive metrics such as Shapley value in addition to static ones explored in prior work. We show that adaptive metrics exhibit a trade-off in performance between tasks i.e., improvement on one task may degrade performance on the other due to differences in the computed block influences. Furthermore, we extend this analysis from a complete block to individual self-attention and feed-forward layers, highlighting the propensity of the self-attention layers to be more amendable to pruning, even allowing removal of upto 33% of the self-attention layers without incurring any performance degradation on MMLU for Mistral 7b (significant reduction in costly maintenance of KV-cache). Finally, we look at simple performance recovery techniques to emulate the pruned layers by training lightweight additive bias or low-rank linear adapters. Performance recovery using emulated updates avoids performance degradation for the initial blocks (up to 5% absolute improvement on MMLU), which is either competitive or superior to the learning-based technique.
△ Less
Submitted 23 July, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
The Perils of Optimizing Learned Reward Functions: Low Training Error Does Not Guarantee Low Regret
Authors:
Lukas Fluri,
Leon Lang,
Alessandro Abate,
Patrick Forré,
David Krueger,
Joar Skalse
Abstract:
In reinforcement learning, specifying reward functions that capture the intended task can be very challenging. Reward learning aims to address this issue by learning the reward function. However, a learned reward model may have a low error on the training distribution, and yet subsequently produce a policy with large regret. We say that such a reward model has an error-regret mismatch. The main so…
▽ More
In reinforcement learning, specifying reward functions that capture the intended task can be very challenging. Reward learning aims to address this issue by learning the reward function. However, a learned reward model may have a low error on the training distribution, and yet subsequently produce a policy with large regret. We say that such a reward model has an error-regret mismatch. The main source of an error-regret mismatch is the distributional shift that commonly occurs during policy optimization. In this paper, we mathematically show that a sufficiently low expected test error of the reward model guarantees low worst-case regret, but that for any fixed expected test error, there exist realistic data distributions that allow for error-regret mismatch to occur. We then show that similar problems persist even when using policy regularization techniques, commonly employed in methods such as RLHF. Our theoretical results highlight the importance of developing new ways to measure the quality of learned reward models.
△ Less
Submitted 22 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Affirmative safety: An approach to risk management for high-risk AI
Authors:
Akash R. Wasil,
Joshua Clymer,
David Krueger,
Emily Dardaman,
Simeon Campos,
Evan R. Murphy
Abstract:
Prominent AI experts have suggested that companies developing high-risk AI systems should be required to show that such systems are safe before they can be developed or deployed. The goal of this paper is to expand on this idea and explore its implications for risk management. We argue that entities developing or deploying high-risk AI systems should be required to present evidence of affirmative…
▽ More
Prominent AI experts have suggested that companies developing high-risk AI systems should be required to show that such systems are safe before they can be developed or deployed. The goal of this paper is to expand on this idea and explore its implications for risk management. We argue that entities developing or deploying high-risk AI systems should be required to present evidence of affirmative safety: a proactive case that their activities keep risks below acceptable thresholds. We begin the paper by highlighting global security risks from AI that have been acknowledged by AI experts and world governments. Next, we briefly describe principles of risk management from other high-risk fields (e.g., nuclear safety). Then, we propose a risk management approach for advanced AI in which model developers must provide evidence that their activities keep certain risks below regulator-set thresholds. As a first step toward understanding what affirmative safety cases should include, we illustrate how certain kinds of technical evidence and operational evidence can support an affirmative safety case. In the technical section, we discuss behavioral evidence (evidence about model outputs), cognitive evidence (evidence about model internals), and developmental evidence (evidence about the training process). In the operational section, we offer examples of organizational practices that could contribute to affirmative safety cases: information security practices, safety culture, and emergency response capacity. Finally, we briefly compare our approach to the NIST AI Risk Management Framework. Overall, we hope our work contributes to ongoing discussions about national and global security risks posed by AI and regulatory approaches to address these risks.
△ Less
Submitted 14 April, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
IDs for AI Systems
Authors:
Alan Chan,
Noam Kolt,
Peter Wills,
Usman Anwar,
Christian Schroeder de Witt,
Nitarshan Rajkumar,
Lewis Hammond,
David Krueger,
Lennart Heim,
Markus Anderljung
Abstract:
AI systems are increasingly pervasive, yet information needed to decide whether and how to engage with them may not exist or be accessible. A user may not be able to verify whether a system has certain safety certifications. An investigator may not know whom to investigate when a system causes an incident. It may not be clear whom to contact to shut down a malfunctioning system. Across a number of…
▽ More
AI systems are increasingly pervasive, yet information needed to decide whether and how to engage with them may not exist or be accessible. A user may not be able to verify whether a system has certain safety certifications. An investigator may not know whom to investigate when a system causes an incident. It may not be clear whom to contact to shut down a malfunctioning system. Across a number of domains, IDs address analogous problems by identifying particular entities (e.g., a particular Boeing 747) and providing information about other entities of the same class (e.g., some or all Boeing 747s). We propose a framework in which IDs are ascribed to instances of AI systems (e.g., a particular chat session with Claude 3), and associated information is accessible to parties seeking to interact with that system. We characterize IDs for AI systems, provide concrete examples where IDs could be useful, argue that there could be significant demand for IDs from key actors, analyze how those actors could incentivize ID adoption, explore a potential implementation of our framework for deployers of AI systems, and highlight limitations and risks. IDs seem most warranted in settings where AI systems could have a large impact upon the world, such as in making financial transactions or contacting real humans. With further study, IDs could help to manage a world where AI systems pervade society.
△ Less
Submitted 18 July, 2024; v1 submitted 17 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Stress-Testing Capability Elicitation With Password-Locked Models
Authors:
Ryan Greenblatt,
Fabien Roger,
Dmitrii Krasheninnikov,
David Krueger
Abstract:
To determine the safety of large language models (LLMs), AI developers must be able to assess their dangerous capabilities. But simple prompting strategies often fail to elicit an LLM's full capabilities. One way to elicit capabilities more robustly is to fine-tune the LLM to complete the task. In this paper, we investigate the conditions under which fine-tuning-based elicitation suffices to elici…
▽ More
To determine the safety of large language models (LLMs), AI developers must be able to assess their dangerous capabilities. But simple prompting strategies often fail to elicit an LLM's full capabilities. One way to elicit capabilities more robustly is to fine-tune the LLM to complete the task. In this paper, we investigate the conditions under which fine-tuning-based elicitation suffices to elicit capabilities. To do this, we introduce password-locked models, LLMs fine-tuned such that some of their capabilities are deliberately hidden. Specifically, these LLMs are trained to exhibit these capabilities only when a password is present in the prompt, and to imitate a much weaker LLM otherwise. Password-locked models enable a novel method of evaluating capabilities elicitation methods, by testing whether these password-locked capabilities can be elicited without using the password. We find that a few high-quality demonstrations are often sufficient to fully elicit password-locked capabilities. More surprisingly, fine-tuning can elicit other capabilities that have been locked using the same password, or even different passwords. Furthermore, when only evaluations, and not demonstrations, are available, approaches like reinforcement learning are still often able to elicit capabilities. Overall, our findings suggest that fine-tuning is an effective method of eliciting hidden capabilities of current models, but may be unreliable when high-quality demonstrations are not available, e.g. as may be the case when models' (hidden) capabilities exceed those of human demonstrators.
△ Less
Submitted 29 May, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
-
Foundational Challenges in Assuring Alignment and Safety of Large Language Models
Authors:
Usman Anwar,
Abulhair Saparov,
Javier Rando,
Daniel Paleka,
Miles Turpin,
Peter Hase,
Ekdeep Singh Lubana,
Erik Jenner,
Stephen Casper,
Oliver Sourbut,
Benjamin L. Edelman,
Zhaowei Zhang,
Mario Günther,
Anton Korinek,
Jose Hernandez-Orallo,
Lewis Hammond,
Eric Bigelow,
Alexander Pan,
Lauro Langosco,
Tomasz Korbak,
Heidi Zhang,
Ruiqi Zhong,
Seán Ó hÉigeartaigh,
Gabriel Recchia,
Giulio Corsi
, et al. (13 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
This work identifies 18 foundational challenges in assuring the alignment and safety of large language models (LLMs). These challenges are organized into three different categories: scientific understanding of LLMs, development and deployment methods, and sociotechnical challenges. Based on the identified challenges, we pose $200+$ concrete research questions.
This work identifies 18 foundational challenges in assuring the alignment and safety of large language models (LLMs). These challenges are organized into three different categories: scientific understanding of LLMs, development and deployment methods, and sociotechnical challenges. Based on the identified challenges, we pose $200+$ concrete research questions.
△ Less
Submitted 15 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
Safety Cases: How to Justify the Safety of Advanced AI Systems
Authors:
Joshua Clymer,
Nick Gabrieli,
David Krueger,
Thomas Larsen
Abstract:
As AI systems become more advanced, companies and regulators will make difficult decisions about whether it is safe to train and deploy them. To prepare for these decisions, we investigate how developers could make a 'safety case,' which is a structured rationale that AI systems are unlikely to cause a catastrophe. We propose a framework for organizing a safety case and discuss four categories of…
▽ More
As AI systems become more advanced, companies and regulators will make difficult decisions about whether it is safe to train and deploy them. To prepare for these decisions, we investigate how developers could make a 'safety case,' which is a structured rationale that AI systems are unlikely to cause a catastrophe. We propose a framework for organizing a safety case and discuss four categories of arguments to justify safety: total inability to cause a catastrophe, sufficiently strong control measures, trustworthiness despite capability to cause harm, and -- if AI systems become much more powerful -- deference to credible AI advisors. We evaluate concrete examples of arguments in each category and outline how arguments could be combined to justify that AI systems are safe to deploy.
△ Less
Submitted 18 March, 2024; v1 submitted 15 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
A Generative Model of Symmetry Transformations
Authors:
James Urquhart Allingham,
Bruno Kacper Mlodozeniec,
Shreyas Padhy,
Javier Antorán,
David Krueger,
Richard E. Turner,
Eric Nalisnick,
José Miguel Hernández-Lobato
Abstract:
Correctly capturing the symmetry transformations of data can lead to efficient models with strong generalization capabilities, though methods incorporating symmetries often require prior knowledge. While recent advancements have been made in learning those symmetries directly from the dataset, most of this work has focused on the discriminative setting. In this paper, we take inspiration from grou…
▽ More
Correctly capturing the symmetry transformations of data can lead to efficient models with strong generalization capabilities, though methods incorporating symmetries often require prior knowledge. While recent advancements have been made in learning those symmetries directly from the dataset, most of this work has focused on the discriminative setting. In this paper, we take inspiration from group theoretic ideas to construct a generative model that explicitly aims to capture the data's approximate symmetries. This results in a model that, given a prespecified broad set of possible symmetries, learns to what extent, if at all, those symmetries are actually present. Our model can be seen as a generative process for data augmentation. We provide a simple algorithm for learning our generative model and empirically demonstrate its ability to capture symmetries under affine and color transformations, in an interpretable way. Combining our symmetry model with standard generative models results in higher marginal test-log-likelihoods and improved data efficiency.
△ Less
Submitted 20 June, 2024; v1 submitted 4 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
Black-Box Access is Insufficient for Rigorous AI Audits
Authors:
Stephen Casper,
Carson Ezell,
Charlotte Siegmann,
Noam Kolt,
Taylor Lynn Curtis,
Benjamin Bucknall,
Andreas Haupt,
Kevin Wei,
Jérémy Scheurer,
Marius Hobbhahn,
Lee Sharkey,
Satyapriya Krishna,
Marvin Von Hagen,
Silas Alberti,
Alan Chan,
Qinyi Sun,
Michael Gerovitch,
David Bau,
Max Tegmark,
David Krueger,
Dylan Hadfield-Menell
Abstract:
External audits of AI systems are increasingly recognized as a key mechanism for AI governance. The effectiveness of an audit, however, depends on the degree of access granted to auditors. Recent audits of state-of-the-art AI systems have primarily relied on black-box access, in which auditors can only query the system and observe its outputs. However, white-box access to the system's inner workin…
▽ More
External audits of AI systems are increasingly recognized as a key mechanism for AI governance. The effectiveness of an audit, however, depends on the degree of access granted to auditors. Recent audits of state-of-the-art AI systems have primarily relied on black-box access, in which auditors can only query the system and observe its outputs. However, white-box access to the system's inner workings (e.g., weights, activations, gradients) allows an auditor to perform stronger attacks, more thoroughly interpret models, and conduct fine-tuning. Meanwhile, outside-the-box access to training and deployment information (e.g., methodology, code, documentation, data, deployment details, findings from internal evaluations) allows auditors to scrutinize the development process and design more targeted evaluations. In this paper, we examine the limitations of black-box audits and the advantages of white- and outside-the-box audits. We also discuss technical, physical, and legal safeguards for performing these audits with minimal security risks. Given that different forms of access can lead to very different levels of evaluation, we conclude that (1) transparency regarding the access and methods used by auditors is necessary to properly interpret audit results, and (2) white- and outside-the-box access allow for substantially more scrutiny than black-box access alone.
△ Less
Submitted 29 May, 2024; v1 submitted 25 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
Visibility into AI Agents
Authors:
Alan Chan,
Carson Ezell,
Max Kaufmann,
Kevin Wei,
Lewis Hammond,
Herbie Bradley,
Emma Bluemke,
Nitarshan Rajkumar,
David Krueger,
Noam Kolt,
Lennart Heim,
Markus Anderljung
Abstract:
Increased delegation of commercial, scientific, governmental, and personal activities to AI agents -- systems capable of pursuing complex goals with limited supervision -- may exacerbate existing societal risks and introduce new risks. Understanding and mitigating these risks involves critically evaluating existing governance structures, revising and adapting these structures where needed, and ens…
▽ More
Increased delegation of commercial, scientific, governmental, and personal activities to AI agents -- systems capable of pursuing complex goals with limited supervision -- may exacerbate existing societal risks and introduce new risks. Understanding and mitigating these risks involves critically evaluating existing governance structures, revising and adapting these structures where needed, and ensuring accountability of key stakeholders. Information about where, why, how, and by whom certain AI agents are used, which we refer to as visibility, is critical to these objectives. In this paper, we assess three categories of measures to increase visibility into AI agents: agent identifiers, real-time monitoring, and activity logging. For each, we outline potential implementations that vary in intrusiveness and informativeness. We analyze how the measures apply across a spectrum of centralized through decentralized deployment contexts, accounting for various actors in the supply chain including hardware and software service providers. Finally, we discuss the implications of our measures for privacy and concentration of power. Further work into understanding the measures and mitigating their negative impacts can help to build a foundation for the governance of AI agents.
△ Less
Submitted 17 May, 2024; v1 submitted 23 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
Hazards from Increasingly Accessible Fine-Tuning of Downloadable Foundation Models
Authors:
Alan Chan,
Ben Bucknall,
Herbie Bradley,
David Krueger
Abstract:
Public release of the weights of pretrained foundation models, otherwise known as downloadable access \citep{solaiman_gradient_2023}, enables fine-tuning without the prohibitive expense of pretraining. Our work argues that increasingly accessible fine-tuning of downloadable models may increase hazards. First, we highlight research to improve the accessibility of fine-tuning. We split our discussio…
▽ More
Public release of the weights of pretrained foundation models, otherwise known as downloadable access \citep{solaiman_gradient_2023}, enables fine-tuning without the prohibitive expense of pretraining. Our work argues that increasingly accessible fine-tuning of downloadable models may increase hazards. First, we highlight research to improve the accessibility of fine-tuning. We split our discussion into research that A) reduces the computational cost of fine-tuning and B) improves the ability to share that cost across more actors. Second, we argue that increasingly accessible fine-tuning methods may increase hazard through facilitating malicious use and making oversight of models with potentially dangerous capabilities more difficult. Third, we discuss potential mitigatory measures, as well as benefits of more accessible fine-tuning. Given substantial remaining uncertainty about hazards, we conclude by emphasizing the urgent need for the development of mitigations.
△ Less
Submitted 22 December, 2023;
originally announced December 2023.
-
Mechanistically analyzing the effects of fine-tuning on procedurally defined tasks
Authors:
Samyak Jain,
Robert Kirk,
Ekdeep Singh Lubana,
Robert P. Dick,
Hidenori Tanaka,
Edward Grefenstette,
Tim Rocktäschel,
David Scott Krueger
Abstract:
Fine-tuning large pre-trained models has become the de facto strategy for developing both task-specific and general-purpose machine learning systems, including developing models that are safe to deploy. Despite its clear importance, there has been minimal work that explains how fine-tuning alters the underlying capabilities learned by a model during pretraining: does fine-tuning yield entirely nov…
▽ More
Fine-tuning large pre-trained models has become the de facto strategy for developing both task-specific and general-purpose machine learning systems, including developing models that are safe to deploy. Despite its clear importance, there has been minimal work that explains how fine-tuning alters the underlying capabilities learned by a model during pretraining: does fine-tuning yield entirely novel capabilities or does it just modulate existing ones? We address this question empirically in synthetic, controlled settings where we can use mechanistic interpretability tools (e.g., network pruning and probing) to understand how the model's underlying capabilities are changing. We perform an extensive analysis of the effects of fine-tuning in these settings, and show that: (i) fine-tuning rarely alters the underlying model capabilities; (ii) a minimal transformation, which we call a 'wrapper', is typically learned on top of the underlying model capabilities, creating the illusion that they have been modified; and (iii) further fine-tuning on a task where such hidden capabilities are relevant leads to sample-efficient 'revival' of the capability, i.e., the model begins reusing these capability after only a few gradient steps. This indicates that practitioners can unintentionally remove a model's safety wrapper merely by fine-tuning it on a, e.g., superficially unrelated, downstream task. We additionally perform analysis on language models trained on the TinyStories dataset to support our claims in a more realistic setup.
△ Less
Submitted 21 August, 2024; v1 submitted 21 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
-
Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress
Authors:
Yoshua Bengio,
Geoffrey Hinton,
Andrew Yao,
Dawn Song,
Pieter Abbeel,
Trevor Darrell,
Yuval Noah Harari,
Ya-Qin Zhang,
Lan Xue,
Shai Shalev-Shwartz,
Gillian Hadfield,
Jeff Clune,
Tegan Maharaj,
Frank Hutter,
Atılım Güneş Baydin,
Sheila McIlraith,
Qiqi Gao,
Ashwin Acharya,
David Krueger,
Anca Dragan,
Philip Torr,
Stuart Russell,
Daniel Kahneman,
Jan Brauner,
Sören Mindermann
Abstract:
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is progressing rapidly, and companies are shifting their focus to developing generalist AI systems that can autonomously act and pursue goals. Increases in capabilities and autonomy may soon massively amplify AI's impact, with risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and an irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems. Although rese…
▽ More
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is progressing rapidly, and companies are shifting their focus to developing generalist AI systems that can autonomously act and pursue goals. Increases in capabilities and autonomy may soon massively amplify AI's impact, with risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and an irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems. Although researchers have warned of extreme risks from AI, there is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them. Society's response, despite promising first steps, is incommensurate with the possibility of rapid, transformative progress that is expected by many experts. AI safety research is lagging. Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems. In this short consensus paper, we describe extreme risks from upcoming, advanced AI systems. Drawing on lessons learned from other safety-critical technologies, we then outline a comprehensive plan combining technical research and development with proactive, adaptive governance mechanisms for a more commensurate preparation.
△ Less
Submitted 22 May, 2024; v1 submitted 26 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Implicit meta-learning may lead language models to trust more reliable sources
Authors:
Dmitrii Krasheninnikov,
Egor Krasheninnikov,
Bruno Mlodozeniec,
Tegan Maharaj,
David Krueger
Abstract:
We demonstrate that LLMs may learn indicators of document usefulness and modulate their updates accordingly. We introduce random strings ("tags") as indicators of usefulness in a synthetic fine-tuning dataset. Fine-tuning on this dataset leads to implicit meta-learning (IML): in further fine-tuning, the model updates to make more use of text that is tagged as useful. We perform a thorough empirica…
▽ More
We demonstrate that LLMs may learn indicators of document usefulness and modulate their updates accordingly. We introduce random strings ("tags") as indicators of usefulness in a synthetic fine-tuning dataset. Fine-tuning on this dataset leads to implicit meta-learning (IML): in further fine-tuning, the model updates to make more use of text that is tagged as useful. We perform a thorough empirical investigation of this phenomenon, finding (among other things) that (i) it occurs in both pretrained LLMs and those trained from scratch, as well as on a vision task, and (ii) larger models and smaller batch sizes tend to give more IML. We also use probing to examine how IML changes the way models store knowledge in their parameters. Finally, we reflect on what our results might imply about capabilities, risks, and controllability of future AI systems. Our code can be found at https://github.com/krasheninnikov/internalization.
△ Less
Submitted 12 July, 2024; v1 submitted 23 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Interpreting Learned Feedback Patterns in Large Language Models
Authors:
Luke Marks,
Amir Abdullah,
Clement Neo,
Rauno Arike,
David Krueger,
Philip Torr,
Fazl Barez
Abstract:
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is widely used to train large language models (LLMs). However, it is unclear whether LLMs accurately learn the underlying preferences in human feedback data. We coin the term \textit{Learned Feedback Pattern} (LFP) for patterns in an LLM's activations learned during RLHF that improve its performance on the fine-tuning task. We hypothesize that LLMs…
▽ More
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is widely used to train large language models (LLMs). However, it is unclear whether LLMs accurately learn the underlying preferences in human feedback data. We coin the term \textit{Learned Feedback Pattern} (LFP) for patterns in an LLM's activations learned during RLHF that improve its performance on the fine-tuning task. We hypothesize that LLMs with LFPs accurately aligned to the fine-tuning feedback exhibit consistent activation patterns for outputs that would have received similar feedback during RLHF. To test this, we train probes to estimate the feedback signal implicit in the activations of a fine-tuned LLM. We then compare these estimates to the true feedback, measuring how accurate the LFPs are to the fine-tuning feedback. Our probes are trained on a condensed, sparse and interpretable representation of LLM activations, making it easier to correlate features of the input with our probe's predictions. We validate our probes by comparing the neural features they correlate with positive feedback inputs against the features GPT-4 describes and classifies as related to LFPs. Understanding LFPs can help minimize discrepancies between LLM behavior and training objectives, which is essential for the safety of LLMs.
△ Less
Submitted 19 August, 2024; v1 submitted 12 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Reward Model Ensembles Help Mitigate Overoptimization
Authors:
Thomas Coste,
Usman Anwar,
Robert Kirk,
David Krueger
Abstract:
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is a standard approach for fine-tuning large language models to follow instructions. As part of this process, learned reward models are used to approximately model human preferences. However, as imperfect representations of the "true" reward, these learned reward models are susceptible to overoptimization. Gao et al. (2023) studied this phenomenon…
▽ More
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is a standard approach for fine-tuning large language models to follow instructions. As part of this process, learned reward models are used to approximately model human preferences. However, as imperfect representations of the "true" reward, these learned reward models are susceptible to overoptimization. Gao et al. (2023) studied this phenomenon in a synthetic human feedback setup with a significantly larger "gold" reward model acting as the true reward (instead of humans) and showed that overoptimization remains a persistent problem regardless of the size of the proxy reward model and training data used. Using a similar setup, we conduct a systematic study to evaluate the efficacy of using ensemble-based conservative optimization objectives, specifically worst-case optimization (WCO) and uncertainty-weighted optimization (UWO), for mitigating reward model overoptimization when using two optimization methods: (a) best-of-n sampling (BoN) (b) proximal policy optimization (PPO). We additionally extend the setup of Gao et al. (2023) to include 25% label noise to better mirror real-world conditions. Both with and without label noise, we find that conservative optimization practically eliminates overoptimization and improves performance by up to 70% for BoN sampling. For PPO, ensemble-based conservative optimization always reduces overoptimization and outperforms single reward model optimization. Moreover, combining it with a small KL penalty successfully prevents overoptimization at no performance cost. Overall, our results demonstrate that ensemble-based conservative optimization can effectively counter overoptimization.
△ Less
Submitted 10 March, 2024; v1 submitted 4 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Open Problems and Fundamental Limitations of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback
Authors:
Stephen Casper,
Xander Davies,
Claudia Shi,
Thomas Krendl Gilbert,
Jérémy Scheurer,
Javier Rando,
Rachel Freedman,
Tomasz Korbak,
David Lindner,
Pedro Freire,
Tony Wang,
Samuel Marks,
Charbel-Raphaël Segerie,
Micah Carroll,
Andi Peng,
Phillip Christoffersen,
Mehul Damani,
Stewart Slocum,
Usman Anwar,
Anand Siththaranjan,
Max Nadeau,
Eric J. Michaud,
Jacob Pfau,
Dmitrii Krasheninnikov,
Xin Chen
, et al. (7 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is a technique for training AI systems to align with human goals. RLHF has emerged as the central method used to finetune state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs). Despite this popularity, there has been relatively little public work systematizing its flaws. In this paper, we (1) survey open problems and fundamental limitations of RLHF and rel…
▽ More
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is a technique for training AI systems to align with human goals. RLHF has emerged as the central method used to finetune state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs). Despite this popularity, there has been relatively little public work systematizing its flaws. In this paper, we (1) survey open problems and fundamental limitations of RLHF and related methods; (2) overview techniques to understand, improve, and complement RLHF in practice; and (3) propose auditing and disclosure standards to improve societal oversight of RLHF systems. Our work emphasizes the limitations of RLHF and highlights the importance of a multi-faceted approach to the development of safer AI systems.
△ Less
Submitted 11 September, 2023; v1 submitted 27 July, 2023;
originally announced July 2023.
-
Thinker: Learning to Plan and Act
Authors:
Stephen Chung,
Ivan Anokhin,
David Krueger
Abstract:
We propose the Thinker algorithm, a novel approach that enables reinforcement learning agents to autonomously interact with and utilize a learned world model. The Thinker algorithm wraps the environment with a world model and introduces new actions designed for interacting with the world model. These model-interaction actions enable agents to perform planning by proposing alternative plans to the…
▽ More
We propose the Thinker algorithm, a novel approach that enables reinforcement learning agents to autonomously interact with and utilize a learned world model. The Thinker algorithm wraps the environment with a world model and introduces new actions designed for interacting with the world model. These model-interaction actions enable agents to perform planning by proposing alternative plans to the world model before selecting a final action to execute in the environment. This approach eliminates the need for handcrafted planning algorithms by enabling the agent to learn how to plan autonomously and allows for easy interpretation of the agent's plan with visualization. We demonstrate the algorithm's effectiveness through experimental results in the game of Sokoban and the Atari 2600 benchmark, where the Thinker algorithm achieves state-of-the-art performance and competitive results, respectively. Visualizations of agents trained with the Thinker algorithm demonstrate that they have learned to plan effectively with the world model to select better actions. Thinker is the first work showing that an RL agent can learn to plan with a learned world model in complex environments.
△ Less
Submitted 26 October, 2023; v1 submitted 27 July, 2023;
originally announced July 2023.
-
Investigating the Nature of 3D Generalization in Deep Neural Networks
Authors:
Shoaib Ahmed Siddiqui,
David Krueger,
Thomas Breuel
Abstract:
Visual object recognition systems need to generalize from a set of 2D training views to novel views. The question of how the human visual system can generalize to novel views has been studied and modeled in psychology, computer vision, and neuroscience. Modern deep learning architectures for object recognition generalize well to novel views, but the mechanisms are not well understood. In this pape…
▽ More
Visual object recognition systems need to generalize from a set of 2D training views to novel views. The question of how the human visual system can generalize to novel views has been studied and modeled in psychology, computer vision, and neuroscience. Modern deep learning architectures for object recognition generalize well to novel views, but the mechanisms are not well understood. In this paper, we characterize the ability of common deep learning architectures to generalize to novel views. We formulate this as a supervised classification task where labels correspond to unique 3D objects and examples correspond to 2D views of the objects at different 3D orientations. We consider three common models of generalization to novel views: (i) full 3D generalization, (ii) pure 2D matching, and (iii) matching based on a linear combination of views. We find that deep models generalize well to novel views, but they do so in a way that differs from all these existing models. Extrapolation to views beyond the range covered by views in the training set is limited, and extrapolation to novel rotation axes is even more limited, implying that the networks do not infer full 3D structure, nor use linear interpolation. Yet, generalization is far superior to pure 2D matching. These findings help with designing datasets with 2D views required to achieve 3D generalization. Code to reproduce our experiments is publicly available: https://github.com/shoaibahmed/investigating_3d_generalization.git
△ Less
Submitted 18 April, 2023;
originally announced April 2023.
-
Characterizing Manipulation from AI Systems
Authors:
Micah Carroll,
Alan Chan,
Henry Ashton,
David Krueger
Abstract:
Manipulation is a common concern in many domains, such as social media, advertising, and chatbots. As AI systems mediate more of our interactions with the world, it is important to understand the degree to which AI systems might manipulate humans without the intent of the system designers. Our work clarifies challenges in defining and measuring manipulation in the context of AI systems. Firstly, w…
▽ More
Manipulation is a common concern in many domains, such as social media, advertising, and chatbots. As AI systems mediate more of our interactions with the world, it is important to understand the degree to which AI systems might manipulate humans without the intent of the system designers. Our work clarifies challenges in defining and measuring manipulation in the context of AI systems. Firstly, we build upon prior literature on manipulation from other fields and characterize the space of possible notions of manipulation, which we find to depend upon the concepts of incentives, intent, harm, and covertness. We review proposals on how to operationalize each factor. Second, we propose a definition of manipulation based on our characterization: a system is manipulative if it acts as if it were pursuing an incentive to change a human (or another agent) intentionally and covertly. Third, we discuss the connections between manipulation and related concepts, such as deception and coercion. Finally, we contextualize our operationalization of manipulation in some applications. Our overall assessment is that while some progress has been made in defining and measuring manipulation from AI systems, many gaps remain. In the absence of a consensus definition and reliable tools for measurement, we cannot rule out the possibility that AI systems learn to manipulate humans without the intent of the system designers. We argue that such manipulation poses a significant threat to human autonomy, suggesting that precautionary actions to mitigate it are warranted.
△ Less
Submitted 30 October, 2023; v1 submitted 16 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
-
Unifying Grokking and Double Descent
Authors:
Xander Davies,
Lauro Langosco,
David Krueger
Abstract:
A principled understanding of generalization in deep learning may require unifying disparate observations under a single conceptual framework. Previous work has studied \emph{grokking}, a training dynamic in which a sustained period of near-perfect training performance and near-chance test performance is eventually followed by generalization, as well as the superficially similar \emph{double desce…
▽ More
A principled understanding of generalization in deep learning may require unifying disparate observations under a single conceptual framework. Previous work has studied \emph{grokking}, a training dynamic in which a sustained period of near-perfect training performance and near-chance test performance is eventually followed by generalization, as well as the superficially similar \emph{double descent}. These topics have so far been studied in isolation. We hypothesize that grokking and double descent can be understood as instances of the same learning dynamics within a framework of pattern learning speeds. We propose that this framework also applies when varying model capacity instead of optimization steps, and provide the first demonstration of model-wise grokking.
△ Less
Submitted 10 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
-
Harms from Increasingly Agentic Algorithmic Systems
Authors:
Alan Chan,
Rebecca Salganik,
Alva Markelius,
Chris Pang,
Nitarshan Rajkumar,
Dmitrii Krasheninnikov,
Lauro Langosco,
Zhonghao He,
Yawen Duan,
Micah Carroll,
Michelle Lin,
Alex Mayhew,
Katherine Collins,
Maryam Molamohammadi,
John Burden,
Wanru Zhao,
Shalaleh Rismani,
Konstantinos Voudouris,
Umang Bhatt,
Adrian Weller,
David Krueger,
Tegan Maharaj
Abstract:
Research in Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Ethics (FATE) has established many sources and forms of algorithmic harm, in domains as diverse as health care, finance, policing, and recommendations. Much work remains to be done to mitigate the serious harms of these systems, particularly those disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. Despite these ongoing harms, new systems…
▽ More
Research in Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Ethics (FATE) has established many sources and forms of algorithmic harm, in domains as diverse as health care, finance, policing, and recommendations. Much work remains to be done to mitigate the serious harms of these systems, particularly those disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. Despite these ongoing harms, new systems are being developed and deployed which threaten the perpetuation of the same harms and the creation of novel ones. In response, the FATE community has emphasized the importance of anticipating harms. Our work focuses on the anticipation of harms from increasingly agentic systems. Rather than providing a definition of agency as a binary property, we identify 4 key characteristics which, particularly in combination, tend to increase the agency of a given algorithmic system: underspecification, directness of impact, goal-directedness, and long-term planning. We also discuss important harms which arise from increasing agency -- notably, these include systemic and/or long-range impacts, often on marginalized stakeholders. We emphasize that recognizing agency of algorithmic systems does not absolve or shift the human responsibility for algorithmic harms. Rather, we use the term agency to highlight the increasingly evident fact that ML systems are not fully under human control. Our work explores increasingly agentic algorithmic systems in three parts. First, we explain the notion of an increase in agency for algorithmic systems in the context of diverse perspectives on agency across disciplines. Second, we argue for the need to anticipate harms from increasingly agentic systems. Third, we discuss important harms from increasingly agentic systems and ways forward for addressing them. We conclude by reflecting on implications of our work for anticipating algorithmic harms from emerging systems.
△ Less
Submitted 11 May, 2023; v1 submitted 20 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
-
Blockwise Self-Supervised Learning at Scale
Authors:
Shoaib Ahmed Siddiqui,
David Krueger,
Yann LeCun,
Stéphane Deny
Abstract:
Current state-of-the-art deep networks are all powered by backpropagation. In this paper, we explore alternatives to full backpropagation in the form of blockwise learning rules, leveraging the latest developments in self-supervised learning. We show that a blockwise pretraining procedure consisting of training independently the 4 main blocks of layers of a ResNet-50 with Barlow Twins' loss functi…
▽ More
Current state-of-the-art deep networks are all powered by backpropagation. In this paper, we explore alternatives to full backpropagation in the form of blockwise learning rules, leveraging the latest developments in self-supervised learning. We show that a blockwise pretraining procedure consisting of training independently the 4 main blocks of layers of a ResNet-50 with Barlow Twins' loss function at each block performs almost as well as end-to-end backpropagation on ImageNet: a linear probe trained on top of our blockwise pretrained model obtains a top-1 classification accuracy of 70.48%, only 1.1% below the accuracy of an end-to-end pretrained network (71.57% accuracy). We perform extensive experiments to understand the impact of different components within our method and explore a variety of adaptations of self-supervised learning to the blockwise paradigm, building an exhaustive understanding of the critical avenues for scaling local learning rules to large networks, with implications ranging from hardware design to neuroscience.
△ Less
Submitted 11 August, 2024; v1 submitted 3 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
-
On The Fragility of Learned Reward Functions
Authors:
Lev McKinney,
Yawen Duan,
David Krueger,
Adam Gleave
Abstract:
Reward functions are notoriously difficult to specify, especially for tasks with complex goals. Reward learning approaches attempt to infer reward functions from human feedback and preferences. Prior works on reward learning have mainly focused on the performance of policies trained alongside the reward function. This practice, however, may fail to detect learned rewards that are not capable of tr…
▽ More
Reward functions are notoriously difficult to specify, especially for tasks with complex goals. Reward learning approaches attempt to infer reward functions from human feedback and preferences. Prior works on reward learning have mainly focused on the performance of policies trained alongside the reward function. This practice, however, may fail to detect learned rewards that are not capable of training new policies from scratch and thus do not capture the intended behavior. Our work focuses on demonstrating and studying the causes of these relearning failures in the domain of preference-based reward learning. We demonstrate with experiments in tabular and continuous control environments that the severity of relearning failures can be sensitive to changes in reward model design and the trajectory dataset composition. Based on our findings, we emphasize the need for more retraining-based evaluations in the literature.
△ Less
Submitted 9 January, 2023;
originally announced January 2023.
-
Domain Generalization for Robust Model-Based Offline Reinforcement Learning
Authors:
Alan Clark,
Shoaib Ahmed Siddiqui,
Robert Kirk,
Usman Anwar,
Stephen Chung,
David Krueger
Abstract:
Existing offline reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms typically assume that training data is either: 1) generated by a known policy, or 2) of entirely unknown origin. We consider multi-demonstrator offline RL, a middle ground where we know which demonstrators generated each dataset, but make no assumptions about the underlying policies of the demonstrators. This is the most natural setting when…
▽ More
Existing offline reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms typically assume that training data is either: 1) generated by a known policy, or 2) of entirely unknown origin. We consider multi-demonstrator offline RL, a middle ground where we know which demonstrators generated each dataset, but make no assumptions about the underlying policies of the demonstrators. This is the most natural setting when collecting data from multiple human operators, yet remains unexplored. Since different demonstrators induce different data distributions, we show that this can be naturally framed as a domain generalization problem, with each demonstrator corresponding to a different domain. Specifically, we propose Domain-Invariant Model-based Offline RL (DIMORL), where we apply Risk Extrapolation (REx) (Krueger et al., 2020) to the process of learning dynamics and rewards models. Our results show that models trained with REx exhibit improved domain generalization performance when compared with the natural baseline of pooling all demonstrators' data. We observe that the resulting models frequently enable the learning of superior policies in the offline model-based RL setting, can improve the stability of the policy learning process, and potentially enable increased exploration.
△ Less
Submitted 27 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
-
Mechanistic Mode Connectivity
Authors:
Ekdeep Singh Lubana,
Eric J. Bigelow,
Robert P. Dick,
David Krueger,
Hidenori Tanaka
Abstract:
We study neural network loss landscapes through the lens of mode connectivity, the observation that minimizers of neural networks retrieved via training on a dataset are connected via simple paths of low loss. Specifically, we ask the following question: are minimizers that rely on different mechanisms for making their predictions connected via simple paths of low loss? We provide a definition of…
▽ More
We study neural network loss landscapes through the lens of mode connectivity, the observation that minimizers of neural networks retrieved via training on a dataset are connected via simple paths of low loss. Specifically, we ask the following question: are minimizers that rely on different mechanisms for making their predictions connected via simple paths of low loss? We provide a definition of mechanistic similarity as shared invariances to input transformations and demonstrate that lack of linear connectivity between two models implies they use dissimilar mechanisms for making their predictions. Relevant to practice, this result helps us demonstrate that naive fine-tuning on a downstream dataset can fail to alter a model's mechanisms, e.g., fine-tuning can fail to eliminate a model's reliance on spurious attributes. Our analysis also motivates a method for targeted alteration of a model's mechanisms, named connectivity-based fine-tuning (CBFT), which we analyze using several synthetic datasets for the task of reducing a model's reliance on spurious attributes.
△ Less
Submitted 1 June, 2023; v1 submitted 15 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
-
Broken Neural Scaling Laws
Authors:
Ethan Caballero,
Kshitij Gupta,
Irina Rish,
David Krueger
Abstract:
We present a smoothly broken power law functional form (that we refer to as a Broken Neural Scaling Law (BNSL)) that accurately models & extrapolates the scaling behaviors of deep neural networks (i.e. how the evaluation metric of interest varies as amount of compute used for training (or inference), number of model parameters, training dataset size, model input size, number of training steps, or…
▽ More
We present a smoothly broken power law functional form (that we refer to as a Broken Neural Scaling Law (BNSL)) that accurately models & extrapolates the scaling behaviors of deep neural networks (i.e. how the evaluation metric of interest varies as amount of compute used for training (or inference), number of model parameters, training dataset size, model input size, number of training steps, or upstream performance varies) for various architectures & for each of various tasks within a large & diverse set of upstream & downstream tasks, in zero-shot, prompted, & finetuned settings. This set includes large-scale vision, language, audio, video, diffusion, generative modeling, multimodal learning, contrastive learning, AI alignment, AI capabilities, robotics, out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization, continual learning, transfer learning, uncertainty estimation / calibration, OOD detection, adversarial robustness, distillation, sparsity, retrieval, quantization, pruning, fairness, molecules, computer programming/coding, math word problems, "emergent phase transitions", arithmetic, supervised learning, unsupervised/self-supervised learning, & reinforcement learning (single agent & multi-agent). When compared to other functional forms for neural scaling, this functional form yields extrapolations of scaling behavior that are considerably more accurate on this set. Moreover, this functional form accurately models & extrapolates scaling behavior that other functional forms are incapable of expressing such as the nonmonotonic transitions present in the scaling behavior of phenomena such as double descent & the delayed, sharp inflection points present in the scaling behavior of tasks such as arithmetic. Lastly, we use this functional form to glean insights about the limit of the predictability of scaling behavior. Code is available at https://github.com/ethancaballero/broken_neural_scaling_laws
△ Less
Submitted 23 July, 2023; v1 submitted 26 October, 2022;
originally announced October 2022.
-
Towards Out-of-Distribution Adversarial Robustness
Authors:
Adam Ibrahim,
Charles Guille-Escuret,
Ioannis Mitliagkas,
Irina Rish,
David Krueger,
Pouya Bashivan
Abstract:
Adversarial robustness continues to be a major challenge for deep learning. A core issue is that robustness to one type of attack often fails to transfer to other attacks. While prior work establishes a theoretical trade-off in robustness against different $L_p$ norms, we show that there is potential for improvement against many commonly used attacks by adopting a domain generalisation approach. C…
▽ More
Adversarial robustness continues to be a major challenge for deep learning. A core issue is that robustness to one type of attack often fails to transfer to other attacks. While prior work establishes a theoretical trade-off in robustness against different $L_p$ norms, we show that there is potential for improvement against many commonly used attacks by adopting a domain generalisation approach. Concretely, we treat each type of attack as a domain, and apply the Risk Extrapolation method (REx), which promotes similar levels of robustness against all training attacks. Compared to existing methods, we obtain similar or superior worst-case adversarial robustness on attacks seen during training. Moreover, we achieve superior performance on families or tunings of attacks only encountered at test time. On ensembles of attacks, our approach improves the accuracy from 3.4% with the best existing baseline to 25.9% on MNIST, and from 16.9% to 23.5% on CIFAR10.
△ Less
Submitted 26 June, 2023; v1 submitted 6 October, 2022;
originally announced October 2022.
-
Defining and Characterizing Reward Hacking
Authors:
Joar Skalse,
Nikolaus H. R. Howe,
Dmitrii Krasheninnikov,
David Krueger
Abstract:
We provide the first formal definition of reward hacking, a phenomenon where optimizing an imperfect proxy reward function, $\mathcal{\tilde{R}}$, leads to poor performance according to the true reward function, $\mathcal{R}$. We say that a proxy is unhackable if increasing the expected proxy return can never decrease the expected true return. Intuitively, it might be possible to create an unhacka…
▽ More
We provide the first formal definition of reward hacking, a phenomenon where optimizing an imperfect proxy reward function, $\mathcal{\tilde{R}}$, leads to poor performance according to the true reward function, $\mathcal{R}$. We say that a proxy is unhackable if increasing the expected proxy return can never decrease the expected true return. Intuitively, it might be possible to create an unhackable proxy by leaving some terms out of the reward function (making it "narrower") or overlooking fine-grained distinctions between roughly equivalent outcomes, but we show this is usually not the case. A key insight is that the linearity of reward (in state-action visit counts) makes unhackability a very strong condition. In particular, for the set of all stochastic policies, two reward functions can only be unhackable if one of them is constant. We thus turn our attention to deterministic policies and finite sets of stochastic policies, where non-trivial unhackable pairs always exist, and establish necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of simplifications, an important special case of unhackability. Our results reveal a tension between using reward functions to specify narrow tasks and aligning AI systems with human values.
△ Less
Submitted 26 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
Metadata Archaeology: Unearthing Data Subsets by Leveraging Training Dynamics
Authors:
Shoaib Ahmed Siddiqui,
Nitarshan Rajkumar,
Tegan Maharaj,
David Krueger,
Sara Hooker
Abstract:
Modern machine learning research relies on relatively few carefully curated datasets. Even in these datasets, and typically in `untidy' or raw data, practitioners are faced with significant issues of data quality and diversity which can be prohibitively labor intensive to address. Existing methods for dealing with these challenges tend to make strong assumptions about the particular issues at play…
▽ More
Modern machine learning research relies on relatively few carefully curated datasets. Even in these datasets, and typically in `untidy' or raw data, practitioners are faced with significant issues of data quality and diversity which can be prohibitively labor intensive to address. Existing methods for dealing with these challenges tend to make strong assumptions about the particular issues at play, and often require a priori knowledge or metadata such as domain labels. Our work is orthogonal to these methods: we instead focus on providing a unified and efficient framework for Metadata Archaeology -- uncovering and inferring metadata of examples in a dataset. We curate different subsets of data that might exist in a dataset (e.g. mislabeled, atypical, or out-of-distribution examples) using simple transformations, and leverage differences in learning dynamics between these probe suites to infer metadata of interest. Our method is on par with far more sophisticated mitigation methods across different tasks: identifying and correcting mislabeled examples, classifying minority-group samples, prioritizing points relevant for training and enabling scalable human auditing of relevant examples.
△ Less
Submitted 20 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
Recommendations on test datasets for evaluating AI solutions in pathology
Authors:
André Homeyer,
Christian Geißler,
Lars Ole Schwen,
Falk Zakrzewski,
Theodore Evans,
Klaus Strohmenger,
Max Westphal,
Roman David Bülow,
Michaela Kargl,
Aray Karjauv,
Isidre Munné-Bertran,
Carl Orge Retzlaff,
Adrià Romero-López,
Tomasz Sołtysiński,
Markus Plass,
Rita Carvalho,
Peter Steinbach,
Yu-Chia Lan,
Nassim Bouteldja,
David Haber,
Mateo Rojas-Carulla,
Alireza Vafaei Sadr,
Matthias Kraft,
Daniel Krüger,
Rutger Fick
, et al. (5 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions that automatically extract information from digital histology images have shown great promise for improving pathological diagnosis. Prior to routine use, it is important to evaluate their predictive performance and obtain regulatory approval. This assessment requires appropriate test datasets. However, compiling such datasets is challenging and specific recom…
▽ More
Artificial intelligence (AI) solutions that automatically extract information from digital histology images have shown great promise for improving pathological diagnosis. Prior to routine use, it is important to evaluate their predictive performance and obtain regulatory approval. This assessment requires appropriate test datasets. However, compiling such datasets is challenging and specific recommendations are missing.
A committee of various stakeholders, including commercial AI developers, pathologists, and researchers, discussed key aspects and conducted extensive literature reviews on test datasets in pathology. Here, we summarize the results and derive general recommendations for the collection of test datasets.
We address several questions: Which and how many images are needed? How to deal with low-prevalence subsets? How can potential bias be detected? How should datasets be reported? What are the regulatory requirements in different countries?
The recommendations are intended to help AI developers demonstrate the utility of their products and to help regulatory agencies and end users verify reported performance measures. Further research is needed to formulate criteria for sufficiently representative test datasets so that AI solutions can operate with less user intervention and better support diagnostic workflows in the future.
△ Less
Submitted 21 April, 2022;
originally announced April 2022.
-
Multi-Domain Balanced Sampling Improves Out-of-Distribution Generalization of Chest X-ray Pathology Prediction Models
Authors:
Enoch Tetteh,
Joseph Viviano,
Yoshua Bengio,
David Krueger,
Joseph Paul Cohen
Abstract:
Learning models that generalize under different distribution shifts in medical imaging has been a long-standing research challenge. There have been several proposals for efficient and robust visual representation learning among vision research practitioners, especially in the sensitive and critical biomedical domain. In this paper, we propose an idea for out-of-distribution generalization of chest…
▽ More
Learning models that generalize under different distribution shifts in medical imaging has been a long-standing research challenge. There have been several proposals for efficient and robust visual representation learning among vision research practitioners, especially in the sensitive and critical biomedical domain. In this paper, we propose an idea for out-of-distribution generalization of chest X-ray pathologies that uses a simple balanced batch sampling technique. We observed that balanced sampling between the multiple training datasets improves the performance over baseline models trained without balancing.
△ Less
Submitted 27 December, 2021; v1 submitted 27 December, 2021;
originally announced December 2021.
-
Filling gaps in trustworthy development of AI
Authors:
Shahar Avin,
Haydn Belfield,
Miles Brundage,
Gretchen Krueger,
Jasmine Wang,
Adrian Weller,
Markus Anderljung,
Igor Krawczuk,
David Krueger,
Jonathan Lebensold,
Tegan Maharaj,
Noa Zilberman
Abstract:
The range of application of artificial intelligence (AI) is vast, as is the potential for harm. Growing awareness of potential risks from AI systems has spurred action to address those risks, while eroding confidence in AI systems and the organizations that develop them. A 2019 study found over 80 organizations that published and adopted "AI ethics principles'', and more have joined since. But the…
▽ More
The range of application of artificial intelligence (AI) is vast, as is the potential for harm. Growing awareness of potential risks from AI systems has spurred action to address those risks, while eroding confidence in AI systems and the organizations that develop them. A 2019 study found over 80 organizations that published and adopted "AI ethics principles'', and more have joined since. But the principles often leave a gap between the "what" and the "how" of trustworthy AI development. Such gaps have enabled questionable or ethically dubious behavior, which casts doubts on the trustworthiness of specific organizations, and the field more broadly. There is thus an urgent need for concrete methods that both enable AI developers to prevent harm and allow them to demonstrate their trustworthiness through verifiable behavior. Below, we explore mechanisms (drawn from arXiv:2004.07213) for creating an ecosystem where AI developers can earn trust - if they are trustworthy. Better assessment of developer trustworthiness could inform user choice, employee actions, investment decisions, legal recourse, and emerging governance regimes.
△ Less
Submitted 14 December, 2021;
originally announced December 2021.
-
Goal Misgeneralization in Deep Reinforcement Learning
Authors:
Lauro Langosco,
Jack Koch,
Lee Sharkey,
Jacob Pfau,
Laurent Orseau,
David Krueger
Abstract:
We study goal misgeneralization, a type of out-of-distribution generalization failure in reinforcement learning (RL). Goal misgeneralization failures occur when an RL agent retains its capabilities out-of-distribution yet pursues the wrong goal. For instance, an agent might continue to competently avoid obstacles, but navigate to the wrong place. In contrast, previous works have typically focused…
▽ More
We study goal misgeneralization, a type of out-of-distribution generalization failure in reinforcement learning (RL). Goal misgeneralization failures occur when an RL agent retains its capabilities out-of-distribution yet pursues the wrong goal. For instance, an agent might continue to competently avoid obstacles, but navigate to the wrong place. In contrast, previous works have typically focused on capability generalization failures, where an agent fails to do anything sensible at test time. We formalize this distinction between capability and goal generalization, provide the first empirical demonstrations of goal misgeneralization, and present a partial characterization of its causes.
△ Less
Submitted 9 January, 2023; v1 submitted 28 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
Active Reinforcement Learning: Observing Rewards at a Cost
Authors:
David Krueger,
Jan Leike,
Owain Evans,
John Salvatier
Abstract:
Active reinforcement learning (ARL) is a variant on reinforcement learning where the agent does not observe the reward unless it chooses to pay a query cost c > 0. The central question of ARL is how to quantify the long-term value of reward information. Even in multi-armed bandits, computing the value of this information is intractable and we have to rely on heuristics. We propose and evaluate sev…
▽ More
Active reinforcement learning (ARL) is a variant on reinforcement learning where the agent does not observe the reward unless it chooses to pay a query cost c > 0. The central question of ARL is how to quantify the long-term value of reward information. Even in multi-armed bandits, computing the value of this information is intractable and we have to rely on heuristics. We propose and evaluate several heuristic approaches for ARL in multi-armed bandits and (tabular) Markov decision processes, and discuss and illustrate some challenging aspects of the ARL problem.
△ Less
Submitted 24 November, 2020; v1 submitted 12 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
-
Hidden Incentives for Auto-Induced Distributional Shift
Authors:
David Krueger,
Tegan Maharaj,
Jan Leike
Abstract:
Decisions made by machine learning systems have increasing influence on the world, yet it is common for machine learning algorithms to assume that no such influence exists. An example is the use of the i.i.d. assumption in content recommendation. In fact, the (choice of) content displayed can change users' perceptions and preferences, or even drive them away, causing a shift in the distribution of…
▽ More
Decisions made by machine learning systems have increasing influence on the world, yet it is common for machine learning algorithms to assume that no such influence exists. An example is the use of the i.i.d. assumption in content recommendation. In fact, the (choice of) content displayed can change users' perceptions and preferences, or even drive them away, causing a shift in the distribution of users. We introduce the term auto-induced distributional shift (ADS) to describe the phenomenon of an algorithm causing a change in the distribution of its own inputs. Our goal is to ensure that machine learning systems do not leverage ADS to increase performance when doing so could be undesirable. We demonstrate that changes to the learning algorithm, such as the introduction of meta-learning, can cause hidden incentives for auto-induced distributional shift (HI-ADS) to be revealed. To address this issue, we introduce `unit tests' and a mitigation strategy for HI-ADS, as well as a toy environment for modelling real-world issues with HI-ADS in content recommendation, where we demonstrate that strong meta-learners achieve gains in performance via ADS. We show meta-learning and Q-learning both sometimes fail unit tests, but pass when using our mitigation strategy.
△ Less
Submitted 18 September, 2020;
originally announced September 2020.
-
AI Research Considerations for Human Existential Safety (ARCHES)
Authors:
Andrew Critch,
David Krueger
Abstract:
Framed in positive terms, this report examines how technical AI research might be steered in a manner that is more attentive to humanity's long-term prospects for survival as a species. In negative terms, we ask what existential risks humanity might face from AI development in the next century, and by what principles contemporary technical research might be directed to address those risks.
A key…
▽ More
Framed in positive terms, this report examines how technical AI research might be steered in a manner that is more attentive to humanity's long-term prospects for survival as a species. In negative terms, we ask what existential risks humanity might face from AI development in the next century, and by what principles contemporary technical research might be directed to address those risks.
A key property of hypothetical AI technologies is introduced, called \emph{prepotence}, which is useful for delineating a variety of potential existential risks from artificial intelligence, even as AI paradigms might shift. A set of \auxref{dirtot} contemporary research \directions are then examined for their potential benefit to existential safety. Each research direction is explained with a scenario-driven motivation, and examples of existing work from which to build. The research directions present their own risks and benefits to society that could occur at various scales of impact, and in particular are not guaranteed to benefit existential safety if major developments in them are deployed without adequate forethought and oversight. As such, each direction is accompanied by a consideration of potentially negative side effects.
△ Less
Submitted 29 May, 2020;
originally announced June 2020.
-
Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims
Authors:
Miles Brundage,
Shahar Avin,
Jasmine Wang,
Haydn Belfield,
Gretchen Krueger,
Gillian Hadfield,
Heidy Khlaaf,
Jingying Yang,
Helen Toner,
Ruth Fong,
Tegan Maharaj,
Pang Wei Koh,
Sara Hooker,
Jade Leung,
Andrew Trask,
Emma Bluemke,
Jonathan Lebensold,
Cullen O'Keefe,
Mark Koren,
Théo Ryffel,
JB Rubinovitz,
Tamay Besiroglu,
Federica Carugati,
Jack Clark,
Peter Eckersley
, et al. (34 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
With the recent wave of progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has come a growing awareness of the large-scale impacts of AI systems, and recognition that existing regulations and norms in industry and academia are insufficient to ensure responsible AI development. In order for AI developers to earn trust from system users, customers, civil society, governments, and other stakeholders that they…
▽ More
With the recent wave of progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has come a growing awareness of the large-scale impacts of AI systems, and recognition that existing regulations and norms in industry and academia are insufficient to ensure responsible AI development. In order for AI developers to earn trust from system users, customers, civil society, governments, and other stakeholders that they are building AI responsibly, they will need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable. Those outside of a given organization also need effective means of scrutinizing such claims. This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems and their associated development processes, with a focus on providing evidence about the safety, security, fairness, and privacy protection of AI systems. We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose--spanning institutions, software, and hardware--and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.
△ Less
Submitted 20 April, 2020; v1 submitted 15 April, 2020;
originally announced April 2020.
-
Out-of-Distribution Generalization via Risk Extrapolation (REx)
Authors:
David Krueger,
Ethan Caballero,
Joern-Henrik Jacobsen,
Amy Zhang,
Jonathan Binas,
Dinghuai Zhang,
Remi Le Priol,
Aaron Courville
Abstract:
Distributional shift is one of the major obstacles when transferring machine learning prediction systems from the lab to the real world. To tackle this problem, we assume that variation across training domains is representative of the variation we might encounter at test time, but also that shifts at test time may be more extreme in magnitude. In particular, we show that reducing differences in ri…
▽ More
Distributional shift is one of the major obstacles when transferring machine learning prediction systems from the lab to the real world. To tackle this problem, we assume that variation across training domains is representative of the variation we might encounter at test time, but also that shifts at test time may be more extreme in magnitude. In particular, we show that reducing differences in risk across training domains can reduce a model's sensitivity to a wide range of extreme distributional shifts, including the challenging setting where the input contains both causal and anti-causal elements. We motivate this approach, Risk Extrapolation (REx), as a form of robust optimization over a perturbation set of extrapolated domains (MM-REx), and propose a penalty on the variance of training risks (V-REx) as a simpler variant. We prove that variants of REx can recover the causal mechanisms of the targets, while also providing some robustness to changes in the input distribution ("covariate shift"). By appropriately trading-off robustness to causally induced distributional shifts and covariate shift, REx is able to outperform alternative methods such as Invariant Risk Minimization in situations where these types of shift co-occur.
△ Less
Submitted 25 February, 2021; v1 submitted 2 March, 2020;
originally announced March 2020.
-
Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research direction
Authors:
Jan Leike,
David Krueger,
Tom Everitt,
Miljan Martic,
Vishal Maini,
Shane Legg
Abstract:
One obstacle to applying reinforcement learning algorithms to real-world problems is the lack of suitable reward functions. Designing such reward functions is difficult in part because the user only has an implicit understanding of the task objective. This gives rise to the agent alignment problem: how do we create agents that behave in accordance with the user's intentions? We outline a high-leve…
▽ More
One obstacle to applying reinforcement learning algorithms to real-world problems is the lack of suitable reward functions. Designing such reward functions is difficult in part because the user only has an implicit understanding of the task objective. This gives rise to the agent alignment problem: how do we create agents that behave in accordance with the user's intentions? We outline a high-level research direction to solve the agent alignment problem centered around reward modeling: learning a reward function from interaction with the user and optimizing the learned reward function with reinforcement learning. We discuss the key challenges we expect to face when scaling reward modeling to complex and general domains, concrete approaches to mitigate these challenges, and ways to establish trust in the resulting agents.
△ Less
Submitted 19 November, 2018;
originally announced November 2018.
-
Uncertainty in Multitask Transfer Learning
Authors:
Alexandre Lacoste,
Boris Oreshkin,
Wonchang Chung,
Thomas Boquet,
Negar Rostamzadeh,
David Krueger
Abstract:
Using variational Bayes neural networks, we develop an algorithm capable of accumulating knowledge into a prior from multiple different tasks. The result is a rich and meaningful prior capable of few-shot learning on new tasks. The posterior can go beyond the mean field approximation and yields good uncertainty on the performed experiments. Analysis on toy tasks shows that it can learn from signif…
▽ More
Using variational Bayes neural networks, we develop an algorithm capable of accumulating knowledge into a prior from multiple different tasks. The result is a rich and meaningful prior capable of few-shot learning on new tasks. The posterior can go beyond the mean field approximation and yields good uncertainty on the performed experiments. Analysis on toy tasks shows that it can learn from significantly different tasks while finding similarities among them. Experiments of Mini-Imagenet yields the new state of the art with 74.5% accuracy on 5 shot learning. Finally, we provide experiments showing that other existing methods can fail to perform well in different benchmarks.
△ Less
Submitted 6 July, 2018; v1 submitted 19 June, 2018;
originally announced June 2018.
-
Neural Autoregressive Flows
Authors:
Chin-Wei Huang,
David Krueger,
Alexandre Lacoste,
Aaron Courville
Abstract:
Normalizing flows and autoregressive models have been successfully combined to produce state-of-the-art results in density estimation, via Masked Autoregressive Flows (MAF), and to accelerate state-of-the-art WaveNet-based speech synthesis to 20x faster than real-time, via Inverse Autoregressive Flows (IAF). We unify and generalize these approaches, replacing the (conditionally) affine univariate…
▽ More
Normalizing flows and autoregressive models have been successfully combined to produce state-of-the-art results in density estimation, via Masked Autoregressive Flows (MAF), and to accelerate state-of-the-art WaveNet-based speech synthesis to 20x faster than real-time, via Inverse Autoregressive Flows (IAF). We unify and generalize these approaches, replacing the (conditionally) affine univariate transformations of MAF/IAF with a more general class of invertible univariate transformations expressed as monotonic neural networks. We demonstrate that the proposed neural autoregressive flows (NAF) are universal approximators for continuous probability distributions, and their greater expressivity allows them to better capture multimodal target distributions. Experimentally, NAF yields state-of-the-art performance on a suite of density estimation tasks and outperforms IAF in variational autoencoders trained on binarized MNIST.
△ Less
Submitted 2 April, 2018;
originally announced April 2018.
-
Nested LSTMs
Authors:
Joel Ruben Antony Moniz,
David Krueger
Abstract:
We propose Nested LSTMs (NLSTM), a novel RNN architecture with multiple levels of memory. Nested LSTMs add depth to LSTMs via nesting as opposed to stacking. The value of a memory cell in an NLSTM is computed by an LSTM cell, which has its own inner memory cell. Specifically, instead of computing the value of the (outer) memory cell as $c^{outer}_t = f_t \odot c_{t-1} + i_t \odot g_t$, NLSTM memor…
▽ More
We propose Nested LSTMs (NLSTM), a novel RNN architecture with multiple levels of memory. Nested LSTMs add depth to LSTMs via nesting as opposed to stacking. The value of a memory cell in an NLSTM is computed by an LSTM cell, which has its own inner memory cell. Specifically, instead of computing the value of the (outer) memory cell as $c^{outer}_t = f_t \odot c_{t-1} + i_t \odot g_t$, NLSTM memory cells use the concatenation $(f_t \odot c_{t-1}, i_t \odot g_t)$ as input to an inner LSTM (or NLSTM) memory cell, and set $c^{outer}_t$ = $h^{inner}_t$. Nested LSTMs outperform both stacked and single-layer LSTMs with similar numbers of parameters in our experiments on various character-level language modeling tasks, and the inner memories of an LSTM learn longer term dependencies compared with the higher-level units of a stacked LSTM.
△ Less
Submitted 31 January, 2018;
originally announced January 2018.
-
Deep Prior
Authors:
Alexandre Lacoste,
Thomas Boquet,
Negar Rostamzadeh,
Boris Oreshkin,
Wonchang Chung,
David Krueger
Abstract:
The recent literature on deep learning offers new tools to learn a rich probability distribution over high dimensional data such as images or sounds. In this work we investigate the possibility of learning the prior distribution over neural network parameters using such tools. Our resulting variational Bayes algorithm generalizes well to new tasks, even when very few training examples are provided…
▽ More
The recent literature on deep learning offers new tools to learn a rich probability distribution over high dimensional data such as images or sounds. In this work we investigate the possibility of learning the prior distribution over neural network parameters using such tools. Our resulting variational Bayes algorithm generalizes well to new tasks, even when very few training examples are provided. Furthermore, this learned prior allows the model to extrapolate correctly far from a given task's training data on a meta-dataset of periodic signals.
△ Less
Submitted 15 December, 2017; v1 submitted 13 December, 2017;
originally announced December 2017.
-
Bayesian Hypernetworks
Authors:
David Krueger,
Chin-Wei Huang,
Riashat Islam,
Ryan Turner,
Alexandre Lacoste,
Aaron Courville
Abstract:
We study Bayesian hypernetworks: a framework for approximate Bayesian inference in neural networks. A Bayesian hypernetwork $\h$ is a neural network which learns to transform a simple noise distribution, $p(\vecε) = \N(\vec 0,\mat I)$, to a distribution $q(\pp) := q(h(\vecε))$ over the parameters $\pp$ of another neural network (the "primary network")\@. We train $q$ with variational inference, us…
▽ More
We study Bayesian hypernetworks: a framework for approximate Bayesian inference in neural networks. A Bayesian hypernetwork $\h$ is a neural network which learns to transform a simple noise distribution, $p(\vecε) = \N(\vec 0,\mat I)$, to a distribution $q(\pp) := q(h(\vecε))$ over the parameters $\pp$ of another neural network (the "primary network")\@. We train $q$ with variational inference, using an invertible $\h$ to enable efficient estimation of the variational lower bound on the posterior $p(\pp | \D)$ via sampling. In contrast to most methods for Bayesian deep learning, Bayesian hypernets can represent a complex multimodal approximate posterior with correlations between parameters, while enabling cheap iid sampling of~$q(\pp)$. In practice, Bayesian hypernets can provide a better defense against adversarial examples than dropout, and also exhibit competitive performance on a suite of tasks which evaluate model uncertainty, including regularization, active learning, and anomaly detection.
△ Less
Submitted 24 April, 2018; v1 submitted 12 October, 2017;
originally announced October 2017.
-
A Closer Look at Memorization in Deep Networks
Authors:
Devansh Arpit,
Stanisław Jastrzębski,
Nicolas Ballas,
David Krueger,
Emmanuel Bengio,
Maxinder S. Kanwal,
Tegan Maharaj,
Asja Fischer,
Aaron Courville,
Yoshua Bengio,
Simon Lacoste-Julien
Abstract:
We examine the role of memorization in deep learning, drawing connections to capacity, generalization, and adversarial robustness. While deep networks are capable of memorizing noise data, our results suggest that they tend to prioritize learning simple patterns first. In our experiments, we expose qualitative differences in gradient-based optimization of deep neural networks (DNNs) on noise vs. r…
▽ More
We examine the role of memorization in deep learning, drawing connections to capacity, generalization, and adversarial robustness. While deep networks are capable of memorizing noise data, our results suggest that they tend to prioritize learning simple patterns first. In our experiments, we expose qualitative differences in gradient-based optimization of deep neural networks (DNNs) on noise vs. real data. We also demonstrate that for appropriately tuned explicit regularization (e.g., dropout) we can degrade DNN training performance on noise datasets without compromising generalization on real data. Our analysis suggests that the notions of effective capacity which are dataset independent are unlikely to explain the generalization performance of deep networks when trained with gradient based methods because training data itself plays an important role in determining the degree of memorization.
△ Less
Submitted 1 July, 2017; v1 submitted 16 June, 2017;
originally announced June 2017.
-
Zoneout: Regularizing RNNs by Randomly Preserving Hidden Activations
Authors:
David Krueger,
Tegan Maharaj,
János Kramár,
Mohammad Pezeshki,
Nicolas Ballas,
Nan Rosemary Ke,
Anirudh Goyal,
Yoshua Bengio,
Aaron Courville,
Chris Pal
Abstract:
We propose zoneout, a novel method for regularizing RNNs. At each timestep, zoneout stochastically forces some hidden units to maintain their previous values. Like dropout, zoneout uses random noise to train a pseudo-ensemble, improving generalization. But by preserving instead of dropping hidden units, gradient information and state information are more readily propagated through time, as in feed…
▽ More
We propose zoneout, a novel method for regularizing RNNs. At each timestep, zoneout stochastically forces some hidden units to maintain their previous values. Like dropout, zoneout uses random noise to train a pseudo-ensemble, improving generalization. But by preserving instead of dropping hidden units, gradient information and state information are more readily propagated through time, as in feedforward stochastic depth networks. We perform an empirical investigation of various RNN regularizers, and find that zoneout gives significant performance improvements across tasks. We achieve competitive results with relatively simple models in character- and word-level language modelling on the Penn Treebank and Text8 datasets, and combining with recurrent batch normalization yields state-of-the-art results on permuted sequential MNIST.
△ Less
Submitted 22 September, 2017; v1 submitted 3 June, 2016;
originally announced June 2016.
-
Regularizing RNNs by Stabilizing Activations
Authors:
David Krueger,
Roland Memisevic
Abstract:
We stabilize the activations of Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) by penalizing the squared distance between successive hidden states' norms.
This penalty term is an effective regularizer for RNNs including LSTMs and IRNNs, improving performance on character-level language modeling and phoneme recognition, and outperforming weight noise and dropout.
We achieve competitive performance (18.6\% PE…
▽ More
We stabilize the activations of Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) by penalizing the squared distance between successive hidden states' norms.
This penalty term is an effective regularizer for RNNs including LSTMs and IRNNs, improving performance on character-level language modeling and phoneme recognition, and outperforming weight noise and dropout.
We achieve competitive performance (18.6\% PER) on the TIMIT phoneme recognition task for RNNs evaluated without beam search or an RNN transducer.
With this penalty term, IRNN can achieve similar performance to LSTM on language modeling, although adding the penalty term to the LSTM results in superior performance.
Our penalty term also prevents the exponential growth of IRNN's activations outside of their training horizon, allowing them to generalize to much longer sequences.
△ Less
Submitted 26 April, 2016; v1 submitted 26 November, 2015;
originally announced November 2015.
-
Testing Visual Attention in Dynamic Environments
Authors:
Philip Bachman,
David Krueger,
Doina Precup
Abstract:
We investigate attention as the active pursuit of useful information. This contrasts with attention as a mechanism for the attenuation of irrelevant information. We also consider the role of short-term memory, whose use is critical to any model incapable of simultaneously perceiving all information on which its output depends. We present several simple synthetic tasks, which become considerably mo…
▽ More
We investigate attention as the active pursuit of useful information. This contrasts with attention as a mechanism for the attenuation of irrelevant information. We also consider the role of short-term memory, whose use is critical to any model incapable of simultaneously perceiving all information on which its output depends. We present several simple synthetic tasks, which become considerably more interesting when we impose strong constraints on how a model can interact with its input, and on how long it can take to produce its output. We develop a model with a different structure from those seen in previous work, and we train it using stochastic variational inference with a learned proposal distribution.
△ Less
Submitted 29 October, 2015;
originally announced October 2015.