A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignment
Abstract
Given the broad capabilities of large language models, it should be possible to work towards a general-purpose, text-based assistant that is aligned with human values, meaning that it is helpful, honest, and harmless. As an initial foray in this direction we study simple baseline techniques and evaluations, such as prompting. We find that the benefits from modest interventions increase with model size, generalize to a variety of alignment evaluations, and do not compromise the performance of large models. Next we investigate scaling trends for several training objectives relevant to alignment, comparing imitation learning, binary discrimination, and ranked preference modeling. We find that ranked preference modeling performs much better than imitation learning, and often scales more favorably with model size. In contrast, binary discrimination typically performs and scales very similarly to imitation learning. Finally we study a `preference model pre-training' stage of training, with the goal of improving sample efficiency when finetuning on human preferences.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2112.00861,
title = {A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignment},
author = {Amanda Askell and Yuntao Bai and Anna Chen and Dawn Drain and Deep Ganguli and Tom Henighan and Andy Jones and Nicholas Joseph and Ben Mann and Nova DasSarma and Nelson Elhage and Zac Hatfield-Dodds and Danny Hernandez and Jackson Kernion and Kamal Ndousse and Catherine Olsson and Dario Amodei and Tom Brown and Jack Clark and Sam McCandlish and Chris Olah and Jared Kaplan},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.00861},
year = {2021}
}
Comments
26+19 pages; v2 typos fixed, refs added, figure scale / colors fixed; v3 correct very non-standard TruthfulQA formatting and metric, alignment implications slightly improved