Showing 1–10 of 10 results for author: Scherrer, N

Introducing v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark from MLCommons

Authors: Bertie Vidgen, Adarsh Agrawal, Ahmed M. Ahmed, Victor Akinwande, Namir Al-Nuaimi, Najla Alfaraj, Elie Alhajjar, Lora Aroyo, Trupti Bavalatti, Max Bartolo, Borhane Blili-Hamelin, Kurt Bollacker, Rishi Bomassani, Marisa Ferrara Boston, Siméon Campos, Kal Chakra, Canyu Chen, Cody Coleman, Zacharie Delpierre Coudert, Leon Derczynski, Debojyoti Dutta, Ian Eisenberg, James Ezick, Heather Frase, Brian Fuller , et al. (75 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: This paper introduces v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark, which has been created by the MLCommons AI Safety Working Group. The AI Safety Benchmark has been designed to assess the safety risks of AI systems that use chat-tuned language models. We introduce a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which for v0.5 covers only a single use case (an adult chatting to a general-pu… ▽ More This paper introduces v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark, which has been created by the MLCommons AI Safety Working Group. The AI Safety Benchmark has been designed to assess the safety risks of AI systems that use chat-tuned language models. We introduce a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which for v0.5 covers only a single use case (an adult chatting to a general-purpose assistant in English), and a limited set of personas (i.e., typical users, malicious users, and vulnerable users). We created a new taxonomy of 13 hazard categories, of which 7 have tests in the v0.5 benchmark. We plan to release version 1.0 of the AI Safety Benchmark by the end of 2024. The v1.0 benchmark will provide meaningful insights into the safety of AI systems. However, the v0.5 benchmark should not be used to assess the safety of AI systems. We have sought to fully document the limitations, flaws, and challenges of v0.5. This release of v0.5 of the AI Safety Benchmark includes (1) a principled approach to specifying and constructing the benchmark, which comprises use cases, types of systems under test (SUTs), language and context, personas, tests, and test items; (2) a taxonomy of 13 hazard categories with definitions and subcategories; (3) tests for seven of the hazard categories, each comprising a unique set of test items, i.e., prompts. There are 43,090 test items in total, which we created with templates; (4) a grading system for AI systems against the benchmark; (5) an openly available platform, and downloadable tool, called ModelBench that can be used to evaluate the safety of AI systems on the benchmark; (6) an example evaluation report which benchmarks the performance of over a dozen openly available chat-tuned language models; (7) a test specification for the benchmark. △ Less

Submitted 13 May, 2024; v1 submitted 18 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

FinanceBench: A New Benchmark for Financial Question Answering

Authors: Pranab Islam, Anand Kannappan, Douwe Kiela, Rebecca Qian, Nino Scherrer, Bertie Vidgen

Abstract: FinanceBench is a first-of-its-kind test suite for evaluating the performance of LLMs on open book financial question answering (QA). It comprises 10,231 questions about publicly traded companies, with corresponding answers and evidence strings. The questions in FinanceBench are ecologically valid and cover a diverse set of scenarios. They are intended to be clear-cut and straightforward to answer… ▽ More FinanceBench is a first-of-its-kind test suite for evaluating the performance of LLMs on open book financial question answering (QA). It comprises 10,231 questions about publicly traded companies, with corresponding answers and evidence strings. The questions in FinanceBench are ecologically valid and cover a diverse set of scenarios. They are intended to be clear-cut and straightforward to answer to serve as a minimum performance standard. We test 16 state of the art model configurations (including GPT-4-Turbo, Llama2 and Claude2, with vector stores and long context prompts) on a sample of 150 cases from FinanceBench, and manually review their answers (n=2,400). The cases are available open-source. We show that existing LLMs have clear limitations for financial QA. Notably, GPT-4-Turbo used with a retrieval system incorrectly answered or refused to answer 81% of questions. While augmentation techniques such as using longer context window to feed in relevant evidence improve performance, they are unrealistic for enterprise settings due to increased latency and cannot support larger financial documents. We find that all models examined exhibit weaknesses, such as hallucinations, that limit their suitability for use by enterprises. △ Less

Submitted 20 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Comments: Dataset is available at: https://huggingface.co/datasets/PatronusAI/financebench

SimpleSafetyTests: a Test Suite for Identifying Critical Safety Risks in Large Language Models

Authors: Bertie Vidgen, Nino Scherrer, Hannah Rose Kirk, Rebecca Qian, Anand Kannappan, Scott A. Hale, Paul Röttger

Abstract: The past year has seen rapid acceleration in the development of large language models (LLMs). However, without proper steering and safeguards, LLMs will readily follow malicious instructions, provide unsafe advice, and generate toxic content. We introduce SimpleSafetyTests (SST) as a new test suite for rapidly and systematically identifying such critical safety risks. The test suite comprises 100… ▽ More The past year has seen rapid acceleration in the development of large language models (LLMs). However, without proper steering and safeguards, LLMs will readily follow malicious instructions, provide unsafe advice, and generate toxic content. We introduce SimpleSafetyTests (SST) as a new test suite for rapidly and systematically identifying such critical safety risks. The test suite comprises 100 test prompts across five harm areas that LLMs, for the vast majority of applications, should refuse to comply with. We test 11 open-access and open-source LLMs and four closed-source LLMs, and find critical safety weaknesses. While some of the models do not give a single unsafe response, most give unsafe responses to more than 20% of the prompts, with over 50% unsafe responses in the extreme. Prepending a safety-emphasising system prompt substantially reduces the occurrence of unsafe responses, but does not completely stop them from happening. Trained annotators labelled every model response to SST (n = 3,000). We use these annotations to evaluate five AI safety filters (which assess whether a models' response is unsafe given a prompt) as a way of automatically evaluating models' performance on SST. The filters' performance varies considerably. There are also differences across the five harm areas, and on the unsafe versus safe responses. The widely-used Perspective API has 72% accuracy and a newly-created zero-shot prompt to OpenAI's GPT-4 performs best with 89% accuracy. Content Warning: This paper contains prompts and responses that relate to child abuse, suicide, self-harm and eating disorders, scams and fraud, illegal items, and physical harm. △ Less

Submitted 16 February, 2024; v1 submitted 14 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Uncovering mesa-optimization algorithms in Transformers

Authors: Johannes von Oswald, Eyvind Niklasson, Maximilian Schlegel, Sei** Kobayashi, Nicolas Zucchet, Nino Scherrer, Nolan Miller, Mark Sandler, Blaise Agüera y Arcas, Max Vladymyrov, Razvan Pascanu, João Sacramento

Abstract: Transformers have become the dominant model in deep learning, but the reason for their superior performance is poorly understood. Here, we hypothesize that the strong performance of Transformers stems from an architectural bias towards mesa-optimization, a learned process running within the forward pass of a model consisting of the following two steps: (i) the construction of an internal learning… ▽ More Transformers have become the dominant model in deep learning, but the reason for their superior performance is poorly understood. Here, we hypothesize that the strong performance of Transformers stems from an architectural bias towards mesa-optimization, a learned process running within the forward pass of a model consisting of the following two steps: (i) the construction of an internal learning objective, and (ii) its corresponding solution found through optimization. To test this hypothesis, we reverse-engineer a series of autoregressive Transformers trained on simple sequence modeling tasks, uncovering underlying gradient-based mesa-optimization algorithms driving the generation of predictions. Moreover, we show that the learned forward-pass optimization algorithm can be immediately repurposed to solve supervised few-shot tasks, suggesting that mesa-optimization might underlie the in-context learning capabilities of large language models. Finally, we propose a novel self-attention layer, the mesa-layer, that explicitly and efficiently solves optimization problems specified in context. We find that this layer can lead to improved performance in synthetic and preliminary language modeling experiments, adding weight to our hypothesis that mesa-optimization is an important operation hidden within the weights of trained Transformers. △ Less

Submitted 11 September, 2023; originally announced September 2023.

Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMs

Authors: Nino Scherrer, Claudia Shi, Amir Feder, David M. Blei

Abstract: This paper presents a case study on the design, administration, post-processing, and evaluation of surveys on large language models (LLMs). It comprises two components: (1) A statistical method for eliciting beliefs encoded in LLMs. We introduce statistical measures and evaluation metrics that quantify the probability of an LLM "making a choice", the associated uncertainty, and the consistency of… ▽ More This paper presents a case study on the design, administration, post-processing, and evaluation of surveys on large language models (LLMs). It comprises two components: (1) A statistical method for eliciting beliefs encoded in LLMs. We introduce statistical measures and evaluation metrics that quantify the probability of an LLM "making a choice", the associated uncertainty, and the consistency of that choice. (2) We apply this method to study what moral beliefs are encoded in different LLMs, especially in ambiguous cases where the right choice is not obvious. We design a large-scale survey comprising 680 high-ambiguity moral scenarios (e.g., "Should I tell a white lie?") and 687 low-ambiguity moral scenarios (e.g., "Should I stop for a pedestrian on the road?"). Each scenario includes a description, two possible actions, and auxiliary labels indicating violated rules (e.g., "do not kill"). We administer the survey to 28 open- and closed-source LLMs. We find that (a) in unambiguous scenarios, most models "choose" actions that align with commonsense. In ambiguous cases, most models express uncertainty. (b) Some models are uncertain about choosing the commonsense action because their responses are sensitive to the question-wording. (c) Some models reflect clear preferences in ambiguous scenarios. Specifically, closed-source models tend to agree with each other. △ Less

Submitted 26 July, 2023; originally announced July 2023.

Trust Your $\nabla$: Gradient-based Intervention Targeting for Causal Discovery

Authors: Mateusz Olko, Michał Zając, Aleksandra Nowak, Nino Scherrer, Yashas Annadani, Stefan Bauer, Łukasz Kuciński, Piotr Miłoś

Abstract: Inferring causal structure from data is a challenging task of fundamental importance in science. Observational data are often insufficient to identify a system's causal structure uniquely. While conducting interventions (i.e., experiments) can improve the identifiability, such samples are usually challenging and expensive to obtain. Hence, experimental design approaches for causal discovery aim to… ▽ More Inferring causal structure from data is a challenging task of fundamental importance in science. Observational data are often insufficient to identify a system's causal structure uniquely. While conducting interventions (i.e., experiments) can improve the identifiability, such samples are usually challenging and expensive to obtain. Hence, experimental design approaches for causal discovery aim to minimize the number of interventions by estimating the most informative intervention target. In this work, we propose a novel Gradient-based Intervention Targeting method, abbreviated GIT, that 'trusts' the gradient estimator of a gradient-based causal discovery framework to provide signals for the intervention acquisition function. We provide extensive experiments in simulated and real-world datasets and demonstrate that GIT performs on par with competitive baselines, surpassing them in the low-data regime. △ Less

Submitted 3 April, 2024; v1 submitted 24 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

Comments: Accepted to 37th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2023)

Federated Causal Discovery From Interventions

Authors: Amin Abyaneh, Nino Scherrer, Patrick Schwab, Stefan Bauer, Bernhard Schölkopf, Arash Mehrjou

Abstract: Causal discovery serves a pivotal role in mitigating model uncertainty through recovering the underlying causal mechanisms among variables. In many practical domains, such as healthcare, access to the data gathered by individual entities is limited, primarily for privacy and regulatory constraints. However, the majority of existing causal discovery methods require the data to be available in a cen… ▽ More Causal discovery serves a pivotal role in mitigating model uncertainty through recovering the underlying causal mechanisms among variables. In many practical domains, such as healthcare, access to the data gathered by individual entities is limited, primarily for privacy and regulatory constraints. However, the majority of existing causal discovery methods require the data to be available in a centralized location. In response, researchers have introduced federated causal discovery. While previous federated methods consider distributed observational data, the integration of interventional data remains largely unexplored. We propose FedCDI, a federated framework for inferring causal structures from distributed data containing interventional samples. In line with the federated learning framework, FedCDI improves privacy by exchanging belief updates rather than raw samples. Additionally, it introduces a novel intervention-aware method for aggregating individual updates. We analyze scenarios with shared or disjoint intervened covariates, and mitigate the adverse effects of interventional data heterogeneity. The performance and scalability of FedCDI is rigorously tested across a variety of synthetic and real-world graphs. △ Less

Submitted 11 February, 2024; v1 submitted 7 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

On the Generalization and Adaption Performance of Causal Models

Authors: Nino Scherrer, Anirudh Goyal, Stefan Bauer, Yoshua Bengio, Nan Rosemary Ke

Abstract: Learning models that offer robust out-of-distribution generalization and fast adaptation is a key challenge in modern machine learning. Modelling causal structure into neural networks holds the promise to accomplish robust zero and few-shot adaptation. Recent advances in differentiable causal discovery have proposed to factorize the data generating process into a set of modules, i.e. one module fo… ▽ More Learning models that offer robust out-of-distribution generalization and fast adaptation is a key challenge in modern machine learning. Modelling causal structure into neural networks holds the promise to accomplish robust zero and few-shot adaptation. Recent advances in differentiable causal discovery have proposed to factorize the data generating process into a set of modules, i.e. one module for the conditional distribution of every variable where only causal parents are used as predictors. Such a modular decomposition of knowledge enables adaptation to distributions shifts by only updating a subset of parameters. In this work, we systematically study the generalization and adaption performance of such modular neural causal models by comparing it to monolithic models and structured models where the set of predictors is not constrained to causal parents. Our analysis shows that the modular neural causal models outperform other models on both zero and few-shot adaptation in low data regimes and offer robust generalization. We also found that the effects are more significant for sparser graphs as compared to denser graphs. △ Less

Submitted 9 June, 2022; originally announced June 2022.

Learning Neural Causal Models with Active Interventions

Authors: Nino Scherrer, Olexa Bilaniuk, Yashas Annadani, Anirudh Goyal, Patrick Schwab, Bernhard Schölkopf, Michael C. Mozer, Yoshua Bengio, Stefan Bauer, Nan Rosemary Ke

Abstract: Discovering causal structures from data is a challenging inference problem of fundamental importance in all areas of science. The appealing properties of neural networks have recently led to a surge of interest in differentiable neural network-based methods for learning causal structures from data. So far, differentiable causal discovery has focused on static datasets of observational or fixed int… ▽ More Discovering causal structures from data is a challenging inference problem of fundamental importance in all areas of science. The appealing properties of neural networks have recently led to a surge of interest in differentiable neural network-based methods for learning causal structures from data. So far, differentiable causal discovery has focused on static datasets of observational or fixed interventional origin. In this work, we introduce an active intervention targeting (AIT) method which enables a quick identification of the underlying causal structure of the data-generating process. Our method significantly reduces the required number of interactions compared with random intervention targeting and is applicable for both discrete and continuous optimization formulations of learning the underlying directed acyclic graph (DAG) from data. We examine the proposed method across multiple frameworks in a wide range of settings and demonstrate superior performance on multiple benchmarks from simulated to real-world data. △ Less

Submitted 5 March, 2022; v1 submitted 6 September, 2021; originally announced September 2021.

Variational Causal Networks: Approximate Bayesian Inference over Causal Structures

Authors: Yashas Annadani, Jonas Rothfuss, Alexandre Lacoste, Nino Scherrer, Anirudh Goyal, Yoshua Bengio, Stefan Bauer

Abstract: Learning the causal structure that underlies data is a crucial step towards robust real-world decision making. The majority of existing work in causal inference focuses on determining a single directed acyclic graph (DAG) or a Markov equivalence class thereof. However, a crucial aspect to acting intelligently upon the knowledge about causal structure which has been inferred from finite data demand… ▽ More Learning the causal structure that underlies data is a crucial step towards robust real-world decision making. The majority of existing work in causal inference focuses on determining a single directed acyclic graph (DAG) or a Markov equivalence class thereof. However, a crucial aspect to acting intelligently upon the knowledge about causal structure which has been inferred from finite data demands reasoning about its uncertainty. For instance, planning interventions to find out more about the causal mechanisms that govern our data requires quantifying epistemic uncertainty over DAGs. While Bayesian causal inference allows to do so, the posterior over DAGs becomes intractable even for a small number of variables. Aiming to overcome this issue, we propose a form of variational inference over the graphs of Structural Causal Models (SCMs). To this end, we introduce a parametric variational family modelled by an autoregressive distribution over the space of discrete DAGs. Its number of parameters does not grow exponentially with the number of variables and can be tractably learned by maximising an Evidence Lower Bound (ELBO). In our experiments, we demonstrate that the proposed variational posterior is able to provide a good approximation of the true posterior. △ Less

Submitted 14 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Comments: 10 pages, 6 figures