宪法人工智能:来自人工智能反馈的无害性

Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback

Yuntao BaiSaurav KadavathSandipan KunduAmanda AskellJohn KernionAndy JonesA. ChenAnna GoldieAzalia MirhoseiniC. McKinnonCarol ChenCatherine OlssonC. OlahDanny HernandezDawn DrainDeep GanguliDustin LiEli Tran-JohnsonE. PerezJamie KerrJ. MuellerJeff LadishJ. LandauKamal NdousseKamilė LukošiūtėLiane LovittMichael SellittoNelson ElhageNicholas SchieferNoem'i MercadoNova DasSarmaR. LasenbyRobin LarsonSam RingerScott JohnstonS. KravecS. E. ShowkStanislav FortTamera LanhamTimothy Telleen-LawtonTom ConerlyT. HenighanTristan HumeSam BowmanZac Hatfield-DoddsBenjamin MannDario AmodeiNicholas JosephSam McCandlishTom B. BrownJared Kaplan

期刊arXiv.org · 2022
引用82
浏览1649
评分
5.0
关键词
large language models constitutional AI supervised learning reinforcement learning harmful prompts critique revision principles human feedback chain-of-thought reasoning
摘要

As AI systems become more capable, we would like to enlist their help to supervise other AIs. We experiment with methods for training a harmless AI assistant through self-improvement, without any human labels identifying harmful outputs. The only human oversight is provided through a list of rules or principles, and so we refer to the method as 'Constitutional AI'. The process involves both a supervised learning and a reinforcement learning phase. In the supervised phase we sample from an initial model, then generate self-critiques and revisions, and then finetune the original model on revised responses. In the RL phase, we sample from the finetuned model, use a model to evaluate which of the two samples is better, and then train a preference model from this dataset of AI preferences. We then train with RL using the preference model as the reward signal, i.e. we use 'RL from AI Feedback' (RLAIF). As a result we are able to train a harmless but non-evasive AI assistant that engages with harmful queries by explaining its objections to them. Both the SL and RL methods can leverage chain-of-thought style reasoning to improve the human-judged performance and transparency of AI decision making. These methods make it possible to control AI behavior more precisely and with far fewer human labels.

AI 理解论文

由海鲸 AI 基于全文生成,仅供参考

这篇文档介绍了一种名为Constitutional AI (CAI) 的方法,用于训练既有帮助性又无害的人工智能(AI)助手,而无需使用人类反馈标签来评估其无害性。该方法通过制定一系列简单的原则或指导方针,即宪法,来实现对AI行为的监督和指导。文档的结构清晰,主要内容包括以下几个方面:

  1. 动机

    • 文档首先介绍了开发该方法的动机,包括研究使用AI帮助人类更有效地监督AI的可能性,改进之前训练的无害AI助手,使AI能够解释其对有害请求的反对意见,提高AI行为原则的透明度,以及减少修改目标时收集新的人类反馈标签的迭代时间。
  2. Constitutional AI 方法

    • 文档详细描述了Constitutional AI (CAI) 方法的实施步骤。该方法分为两个阶段:监督阶段和强化学习(RL)阶段。在监督阶段,通过对AI助手的初始响应进行批判和修订,使用一系列宪法原则来反复修订响应,并最终通过监督学习对最终修订的响应进行微调。在RL阶段,使用模型生成的标签对无害性进行评估,进一步改进无害性,并通过RL对监督学习模型进行微调。
  3. 贡献

    • 文档强调了该方法的贡献,包括通过简单的原则实现对AI行为的监督,训练既有帮助性又无害的AI助手,以及减少对人类反馈标签的依赖,从而更接近自我监督方法。
  4. 相关工作

    • 文档提到了与Constitutional AI 方法相关的其他工作,包括RLHF、LaMDA、InstructGPT等,以及对自我监督、链式思维推理和模型自我批判的讨论。
  5. 讨论

    • 最后,文档讨论了该方法的训练结果,强调了通过Constitutional AI 方法训练的AI助手在无害性方面的改进,并探讨了未来可能的研究方向和潜在的改进空间。

通过对文档的深入理解,可以清晰地了解Constitutional AI 方法的实施细节、动机和贡献,以及其在AI行为监督和指导方面的潜在影响。