We investigate a family of simple long-context attacks on large language models: prompting with hundreds of demonstrations of undesirable behavior. This attack is newly feasible with the larger context windows recently deployed by language model providers like Google DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic. We find that in diverse, realistic circumstances, the effectiveness of this attack follows a power law, up to hundreds of shots. We demonstrate the success of this attack on the most widely used state-of-the-art closed-weight models, and across various tasks. Our results suggest very long contexts present a rich new attack surface for LLMs.

Prompting is the primary way to utilize the multitask capabilities of language models (LMs), but prompts occupy valuable space in the input context window, and repeatedly encoding the same prompt is computationally inefficient. Finetuning and distillation methods allow for specialization of LMs without prompting, but require retraining the model for each task. To avoid this trade-off entirely, we present gisting, which trains an LM to compress prompts into smaller sets of "gist" tokens which can be cached and reused for compute efficiency. Gist models can be trained with no additional cost over standard instruction finetuning by simply modifying Transformer attention masks to encourage prompt compression. On decoder (LLaMA-7B) and encoder-decoder (FLAN-T5-XXL) LMs, gisting enables up to 26x compression of prompts, resulting in up to 40% FLOPs reductions, 4.2% wall time speedups, and storage savings, all with minimal loss in output quality.

Reinforcement learning (RL) agents are particularly hard to train when rewards are sparse. One common solution is to use intrinsic rewards to encourage agents to explore their environment. However, recent intrinsic exploration methods often use state-based novelty measures which reward low-level exploration and may not scale to domains requiring more abstract skills. Instead, we explore natural language as a general medium for highlighting relevant abstractions in an environment. Unlike previous work, we evaluate whether language can improve over existing exploration methods by directly extending (and comparing to) competitive intrinsic exploration baselines: AMIGo (Campero et al., 2021) and NovelD (Zhang et al., 2021). These language-based variants outperform their non-linguistic forms by 47-85% across 13 challenging tasks from the MiniGrid and MiniHack environment suites.

Models can fail in unpredictable ways during deployment due to task ambiguity, when multiple behaviors are consistent with the provided training data. An example is an object classifier trained on red squares and blue circles: when encountering blue squares, the intended behavior is undefined. We investigate whether pretrained models are better active learners, capable of disambiguating between the possible tasks a user may be trying to specify. Intriguingly, we find that better active learning is an emergent property of the pretraining process: pretrained models require up to 5 times fewer labels when using uncertainty-based active learning, while non-pretrained models see no or even negative benefit. We find these gains come from an ability to select examples with attributes that disambiguate the intended behavior, such as rare product categories or atypical backgrounds. These attributes are far more linearly separable in pretrained model's representation spaces vs non-pretrained models, suggesting a possible mechanism for this behavior.

Generating step-by-step "chain-of-thought" rationales improves language model performance on complex reasoning tasks like mathematics or commonsense question-answering. However, inducing language model rationale generation currently requires either constructing massive rationale datasets or sacrificing accuracy by using only few-shot inference. We propose a technique to iteratively leverage a small number of rationale examples and a large dataset without rationales, to bootstrap the ability to perform successively more complex reasoning. This technique, the "Self-Taught Reasoner" (STaR), relies on a simple loop: generate rationales to answer many questions, prompted with a few rationale examples; if the generated answers are wrong, try again to generate a rationale given the correct answer; fine-tune on all the rationales that ultimately yielded correct answers; repeat. We show that STaR significantly improves performance on multiple datasets compared to a model fine-tuned to directly predict final answers, and performs comparably to fine-tuning a 30$\times$ larger state-of-the-art language model on CommensenseQA. Thus, STaR lets a model improve itself by learning from its own generated reasoning.

Recent work has shown that augmenting environments with language descriptions improves policy learning. However, for environments with complex language abstractions, learning how to ground language to observations is difficult due to sparse, delayed rewards. We propose Language Dynamics Distillation (LDD), which pretrains a model to predict environment dynamics given demonstrations with language descriptions, and then fine-tunes these language-aware pretrained representations via reinforcement learning (RL). In this way, the model is trained to both maximize expected reward and retain knowledge about how language relates to environment dynamics. On SILG, a benchmark of five tasks with language descriptions that evaluate distinct generalization challenges on unseen environments (NetHack, ALFWorld, RTFM, Messenger, and Touchdown), LDD outperforms tabula-rasa RL, VAE pretraining, and methods that learn from unlabeled demonstrations in inverse RL and reward shaping with pretrained experts. In our analyses, we show that language descriptions in demonstrations improve sample-efficiency and generalization across environments, and that dynamics modeling with expert demonstrations is more effective than with non-experts.

To build agents that can collaborate effectively with others, recent research has trained artificial agents to communicate with each other in Lewis-style referential games. However, this often leads to successful but uninterpretable communication. We argue that this is due to the game objective: communicating about a single object in a shared visual context is prone to overfitting and does not encourage language useful beyond concrete reference. In contrast, human language conveys a rich variety of abstract ideas. To promote such skills, we propose games that require communicating generalizations over sets of objects representing abstract visual concepts, optionally with separate contexts for each agent. We find that these games greatly improve systematicity and interpretability of the learned languages, according to several metrics in the literature. Finally, we propose a method for identifying logical operations embedded in the emergent languages by learning an approximate compositional reconstruction of the language.

By describing the features and abstractions of our world, language is a crucial tool for human learning and a promising source of supervision for machine learning models.We use language to improve few-shot visual classification in the underexplored scenario where natural language task descriptions are available during training, but unavailable for novel tasks at test time.Existing models for this setting sample new descriptions at test time and use those to classify images.Instead, we propose language-shaped learning (LSL), an end-toend model that regularizes visual representations to predict language.LSL is conceptually simpler, more data efficient, and outperforms baselines in two challenging few-shot domains.

We describe a procedure for explaining neurons in deep representations by identifying compositional logical concepts that closely approximate neuron behavior. Compared to prior work that uses atomic labels as explanations, analyzing neurons compositionally allows us to more precisely and expressively characterize their behavior. We use this procedure to answer several questions on interpretability in models for vision and natural language processing. First, we examine the kinds of abstractions learned by neurons. In image classification, we find that many neurons learn highly abstract but semantically coherent visual concepts, while other polysemantic neurons detect multiple unrelated features; in natural language inference (NLI), neurons learn shallow lexical heuristics from dataset biases. Second, we see whether compositional explanations give us insight into model performance: vision neurons that detect human-interpretable concepts are positively correlated with task performance, while NLI neurons that fire for shallow heuristics are negatively correlated with task performance. Finally, we show how compositional explanations provide an accessible way for end users to produce simple "copy-paste" adversarial examples that change model behavior in predictable ways.

Verbs can only be used with a few specific arrangements of their arguments (syntactic frames). Most theorists note that verbs can be organized into a hierarchy of verb classes based on the frames they admit. Here we show that such a hierarchy is objectively well-supported by the patterns of verbs and frames in English, since a systematic hierarchical clustering algorithm converges on the same structure as the handcrafted taxonomy of VerbNet, a broad-coverage verb lexicon. We also show that the hierarchies capture meaningful psychological dimensions of generalization by predicting novel verb coercions by human participants. We discuss limitations of a simple hierarchical representation and suggest similar approaches for identifying the representations underpinning verb argument structure.