Scalable oversight protocols aim to enable humans to accurately supervise superhuman AI. In this paper we study debate, where two AI's compete to convince a judge; consultancy, where a single AI tries to convince a judge that asks questions; and compare to a baseline of direct question-answering, where the judge just answers outright without the AI. We use large language models (LLMs) as both AI agents and as stand-ins for human judges, taking the judge models to be weaker than agent models. We benchmark on a diverse range of asymmetries between judges and agents, extending previous work on a single extractive QA task with information asymmetry, to also include mathematics, coding, logic and multimodal reasoning asymmetries. We find that debate outperforms consultancy across all tasks when the consultant is randomly assigned to argue for the correct/incorrect answer. Comparing debate to direct question answering, the results depend on the type of task: in extractive QA tasks with information asymmetry debate outperforms direct question answering, but in other tasks without information asymmetry the results are mixed. Previous work assigned debaters/consultants an answer to argue for. When we allow them to instead choose which answer to argue for, we find judges are less frequently convinced by the wrong answer in debate than in consultancy. Further, we find that stronger debater models increase judge accuracy, though more modestly than in previous studies.

We introduce Hindsight Off-policy Options (HO2), a data-efficient option learning algorithm. Given any trajectory, HO2 infers likely option choices and backpropagates through the dynamic programming inference procedure to robustly train all policy components off-policy and end-to-end. The approach outperforms existing option learning methods on common benchmarks. To better understand the option framework and disentangle benefits from both temporal and action abstraction, we evaluate ablations with flat policies and mixture policies with comparable optimization. The results highlight the importance of both types of abstraction as well as off-policy training and trust-region constraints, particularly in challenging, simulated 3D robot manipulation tasks from raw pixel inputs. Finally, we intuitively adapt the inference step to investigate the effect of increased temporal abstraction on training with pre-trained options and from scratch.

Offline reinforcement learning (RL), also known as batch RL, offers the prospect of policy optimization from large pre-recorded datasets without online environment interaction. It addresses challenges with regard to the cost of data collection and safety, both of which are particularly pertinent to real-world applications of RL. Unfortunately, most off-policy algorithms perform poorly when learning from a fixed dataset. In this paper, we propose a novel offline RL algorithm to learn policies from data using a form of critic-regularized regression (CRR). We find that CRR performs surprisingly well and scales to tasks with high-dimensional state and action spaces -- outperforming several state-of-the-art offline RL algorithms by a significant margin on a wide range of benchmark tasks.