Datasets scraped from the internet have been critical to large-scale machine learning. Yet, its success puts the utility of future internet-derived datasets at potential risk, as model outputs begin to replace human annotations as a source of supervision. In this work, we formalize a system where interactions with one model are recorded as history and scraped as training data in the future. We then analyze its stability over time by tracking changes to a test-time bias statistic (e.g. gender bias of model predictions). We find that the degree of bias amplification is closely linked to whether the model's outputs behave like samples from the training distribution, a behavior which we characterize and define as uniform faithfulness. Experiments in three conditional prediction scenarios -- image classification, visual role-labeling, and language generation -- demonstrate that models that exhibit a sampling-like behavior are more faithful and thus more stable. Based on this insight, we propose an intervention to help mitigate and stabilize unstable feedback systems.

We introduce VisIT-Bench (Visual InsTruction Benchmark), a benchmark for evaluating instruction-following vision-language models for real-world use. Our starting point is curating 70 "instruction families" that we envision instruction tuned vision-language models should be able to address. Extending beyond evaluations like VQAv2 and COCO, tasks range from basic recognition to game playing and creative generation. Following curation, our dataset comprises 592 test queries, each with a human-authored instruction-conditioned caption. These descriptions surface instruction-specific factors, e.g., for an instruction asking about the accessibility of a storefront for wheelchair users, the instruction-conditioned caption describes ramps/potential obstacles. These descriptions enable 1) collecting human-verified reference outputs for each instance; and 2) automatic evaluation of candidate multimodal generations using a text-only LLM, aligning with human judgment. We quantify quality gaps between models and references using both human and automatic evaluations; e.g., the top-performing instruction-following model wins against the GPT-4 reference in just 27% of the comparison. VisIT-Bench is dynamic to participate, practitioners simply submit their model's response on the project website; Data, code and leaderboard is available at https://visit-bench.github.io/.

Large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have seen widespread adoption due to their ability to follow user instructions well. Developing these LLMs involves a complex yet poorly understood workflow requiring training with human feedback. Replicating and understanding this instruction-following process faces three major challenges: the high cost of data collection, the lack of trustworthy evaluation, and the absence of reference method implementations. We address these bottlenecks with AlpacaFarm, a simulator that enables research and development for learning from feedback at a low cost. First, we design LLM based simulator for human feedback that is 45x cheaper than crowdworkers and displays high agreement with humans. Second, we identify an evaluation dataset representative of real-world instructions and propose an automatic evaluation procedure. Third, we contribute reference implementations for several methods (PPO, best-of-n, expert iteration, among others) that learn from pairwise feedback. Finally, as an end-to-end validation of AlpacaFarm, we train and evaluate eleven models on 10k pairs of human feedback and show that rankings of models trained in AlpacaFarm match rankings of models trained on human data. As a demonstration of the research possible in AlpacaFarm, we find that methods that use a reward model can substantially improve over supervised fine-tuning and that our reference PPO implementation leads to a +10% win-rate improvement against Davinci003.

For machine learning systems to be reliable, we must understand their performance in unseen, out- of-distribution environments. In this paper, we empirically show that out-of-distribution performance is strongly correlated with in-distribution performance for a wide range of models and distribution shifts. Specifically, we demonstrate strong correlations between in-distribution and out-of- distribution performance on variants of CIFAR- 10 & ImageNet, a synthetic pose estimation task derived from YCB objects, FMoW-WILDS satellite imagery classification, and wildlife classification in iWildCam-WILDS. The correlation holds across model architectures, hyperparameters, training set size, and training duration, and is more precise than what is expected from existing domain adaptation theory. To complete the picture, we also investigate cases where the correlation is weaker, for instance some synthetic distribution shifts from CIFAR-10-C and the tissue classification dataset Camelyon17-WILDS. Finally, we provide a candidate theory based on a Gaussian data model that shows how changes in the data covariance arising from distribution shift can affect the observed correlations.

We study how robust current ImageNet models are to distribution shifts arising from natural variations in datasets. Most research on robustness focuses on synthetic image perturbations (noise, simulated weather artifacts, adversarial examples, etc.), which leaves open how robustness on synthetic distribution shift relates to distribution shift arising in real data. Informed by an evaluation of 204 ImageNet models in 213 different test conditions, we find that there is often little to no transfer of robustness from current synthetic to natural distribution shift. Moreover, most current techniques provide no robustness to the natural distribution shifts in our testbed. The main exception is training on larger and more diverse datasets, which in multiple cases increases robustness, but is still far from closing the performance gaps. Our results indicate that distribution shifts arising in real data are currently an open research problem.