Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Rauno Arike

dblp:358/9520 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 50% Reinforcement learning · 25% Language models and text generation · 25%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
alignment
0.812024
Interpreting Learned Feedback Patterns in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.812024
Interpreting Learned Feedback Patterns in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › AI safety › safety alignment
LLM safety alignment
0.812024
Interpreting Learned Feedback Patterns in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reinforcement learning from human feedback
0.812024
Interpreting Learned Feedback Patterns in Large Language Models · NeurIPS 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

sparse activation representation · 0.8probing · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Interpreting Learned Feedback Patterns in Large Language Models
abstract
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is widely used to train large language models (LLMs). However, it is unclear whether LLMs accurately learn the underlying preferences in human feedback data. We coin the term **Learned Feedback Pattern** (LFP) for patterns in an LLM's activations learned during RLHF that improve its performance on the fine-tuning task. We hypothesize that LLMs with LFPs accurately aligned to the fine-tuning feedback exhibit consistent activation patterns for outputs that would have received similar feedback during RLHF. To test this, we train probes to estimate the feedback signal implicit in the activations of a fine-tuned LLM. We then compare these estimates to the true feedback, measuring how accurate the LFPs are to the fine-tuning feedback. Our probes are trained on a condensed, sparse and interpretable representation of LLM activations, making it easier to correlate features of the input with our probe's predictions. We validate our probes by comparing the neural features they correlate with positive feedback inputs against the features GPT-4 describes and classifies as related to LFPs. Understanding LFPs can help minimize discrepancies between LLM behavior and training objectives, which is essential for the **safety** and **alignment** of LLMs.
Luke Marks, Amir Abdullah, Clement Neo, Rauno Arike, David Krueger 0001, Philip Torr 0001, Fazl Barez
NeurIPS4