Reinforced Self-Training (ReST) for Language Modeling
Authors:
Caglar Gulcehre,
Tom Le Paine,
Srivatsan Srinivasan,
Ksenia Konyushkova,
Lotte Weerts,
Abhishek Sharma,
Aditya Siddhant,
Alex Ahern,
Miaosen Wang,
Chenjie Gu,
Wolfgang Macherey,
Arnaud Doucet,
Orhan Firat,
Nando de Freitas
Abstract:
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) can improve the quality of large language model's (LLM) outputs by aligning them with human preferences. We propose a simple algorithm for aligning LLMs with human preferences inspired by growing batch reinforcement learning (RL), which we call Reinforced Self-Training (ReST). Given an initial LLM policy, ReST produces a dataset by generating sampl…
▽ More
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) can improve the quality of large language model's (LLM) outputs by aligning them with human preferences. We propose a simple algorithm for aligning LLMs with human preferences inspired by growing batch reinforcement learning (RL), which we call Reinforced Self-Training (ReST). Given an initial LLM policy, ReST produces a dataset by generating samples from the policy, which are then used to improve the LLM policy using offline RL algorithms. ReST is more efficient than typical online RLHF methods because the training dataset is produced offline, which allows data reuse. While ReST is a general approach applicable to all generative learning settings, we focus on its application to machine translation. Our results show that ReST can substantially improve translation quality, as measured by automated metrics and human evaluation on machine translation benchmarks in a compute and sample-efficient manner.
△ Less
Submitted 21 August, 2023; v1 submitted 17 August, 2023;
originally announced August 2023.
Evolutionary forces in language change
Authors:
Christopher A. Ahern,
Mitchell G. Newberry,
Robin Clark,
Joshua B. Plotkin
Abstract:
Languages and genes are both transmitted from generation to generation, with opportunity for differential reproduction and survivorship of forms. Here we apply a rigorous inference framework, drawn from population genetics, to distinguish between two broad mechanisms of language change: drift and selection. Drift is change that results from stochasticity in transmission and it may occur in the abs…
▽ More
Languages and genes are both transmitted from generation to generation, with opportunity for differential reproduction and survivorship of forms. Here we apply a rigorous inference framework, drawn from population genetics, to distinguish between two broad mechanisms of language change: drift and selection. Drift is change that results from stochasticity in transmission and it may occur in the absence of any intrinsic difference between linguistic forms; whereas selection is truly an evolutionary force arising from intrinsic differences -- for example, when one form is preferred by members of the population. Using large corpora of parsed texts spanning the 12th century to the 21st century, we analyze three examples of grammatical changes in English: the regularization of past-tense verbs, the rise of the periphrastic `do', and syntactic variation in verbal negation. We show that we can reject stochastic drift in favor of a selective force driving some of these language changes, but not others. The strength of drift depends on a word's frequency, and so drift provides an alternative explanation for why some words are more prone to change than others. Our results suggest an important role for stochasticity in language change, and they provide a null model against which selective theories of language evolution must be compared.
△ Less
Submitted 2 August, 2016;
originally announced August 2016.
