Showing 1–38 of 38 results for author: Wallace, E

Covert Malicious Finetuning: Challenges in Safeguarding LLM Adaptation

Authors: Danny Halawi, Alexander Wei, Eric Wallace, Tony T. Wang, Nika Haghtalab, Jacob Steinhardt

Abstract: Black-box finetuning is an emerging interface for adapting state-of-the-art language models to user needs. However, such access may also let malicious actors undermine model safety. To demonstrate the challenge of defending finetuning interfaces, we introduce covert malicious finetuning, a method to compromise model safety via finetuning while evading detection. Our method constructs a malicious d… ▽ More Black-box finetuning is an emerging interface for adapting state-of-the-art language models to user needs. However, such access may also let malicious actors undermine model safety. To demonstrate the challenge of defending finetuning interfaces, we introduce covert malicious finetuning, a method to compromise model safety via finetuning while evading detection. Our method constructs a malicious dataset where every individual datapoint appears innocuous, but finetuning on the dataset teaches the model to respond to encoded harmful requests with encoded harmful responses. Applied to GPT-4, our method produces a finetuned model that acts on harmful instructions 99% of the time and avoids detection by defense mechanisms such as dataset inspection, safety evaluations, and input/output classifiers. Our findings question whether black-box finetuning access can be secured against sophisticated adversaries. △ Less

Submitted 28 June, 2024; originally announced June 2024.

Comments: 22 pages

The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructions

Authors: Eric Wallace, Kai Xiao, Reimar Leike, Lilian Weng, Johannes Heidecke, Alex Beutel

Abstract: Today's LLMs are susceptible to prompt injections, jailbreaks, and other attacks that allow adversaries to overwrite a model's original instructions with their own malicious prompts. In this work, we argue that one of the primary vulnerabilities underlying these attacks is that LLMs often consider system prompts (e.g., text from an application developer) to be the same priority as text from untrus… ▽ More Today's LLMs are susceptible to prompt injections, jailbreaks, and other attacks that allow adversaries to overwrite a model's original instructions with their own malicious prompts. In this work, we argue that one of the primary vulnerabilities underlying these attacks is that LLMs often consider system prompts (e.g., text from an application developer) to be the same priority as text from untrusted users and third parties. To address this, we propose an instruction hierarchy that explicitly defines how models should behave when instructions of different priorities conflict. We then propose a data generation method to demonstrate this hierarchical instruction following behavior, which teaches LLMs to selectively ignore lower-privileged instructions. We apply this method to GPT-3.5, showing that it drastically increases robustness -- even for attack types not seen during training -- while imposing minimal degradations on standard capabilities. △ Less

Submitted 19 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Stealing Part of a Production Language Model

Authors: Nicholas Carlini, Daniel Paleka, Krishnamurthy Dj Dvijotham, Thomas Steinke, Jonathan Hayase, A. Feder Cooper, Katherine Lee, Matthew Jagielski, Milad Nasr, Arthur Conmy, Eric Wallace, David Rolnick, Florian Tramèr

Abstract: We introduce the first model-stealing attack that extracts precise, nontrivial information from black-box production language models like OpenAI's ChatGPT or Google's PaLM-2. Specifically, our attack recovers the embedding projection layer (up to symmetries) of a transformer model, given typical API access. For under \… ▽ More We introduce the first model-stealing attack that extracts precise, nontrivial information from black-box production language models like OpenAI's ChatGPT or Google's PaLM-2. Specifically, our attack recovers the embedding projection layer (up to symmetries) of a transformer model, given typical API access. For under \$20 USD, our attack extracts the entire projection matrix of OpenAI's Ada and Babbage language models. We thereby confirm, for the first time, that these black-box models have a hidden dimension of 1024 and 2048, respectively. We also recover the exact hidden dimension size of the gpt-3.5-turbo model, and estimate it would cost under \$2,000 in queries to recover the entire projection matrix. We conclude with potential defenses and mitigations, and discuss the implications of possible future work that could extend our attack. △ Less

Submitted 11 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Unfamiliar Finetuning Examples Control How Language Models Hallucinate

Authors: Katie Kang, Eric Wallace, Claire Tomlin, Aviral Kumar, Sergey Levine

Abstract: Large language models are known to hallucinate when faced with unfamiliar queries, but the underlying mechanism that govern how models hallucinate are not yet fully understood. In this work, we find that unfamiliar examples in the models' finetuning data -- those that introduce concepts beyond the base model's scope of knowledge -- are crucial in sha** these errors. In particular, we find that a… ▽ More Large language models are known to hallucinate when faced with unfamiliar queries, but the underlying mechanism that govern how models hallucinate are not yet fully understood. In this work, we find that unfamiliar examples in the models' finetuning data -- those that introduce concepts beyond the base model's scope of knowledge -- are crucial in sha** these errors. In particular, we find that an LLM's hallucinated predictions tend to mirror the responses associated with its unfamiliar finetuning examples. This suggests that by modifying how unfamiliar finetuning examples are supervised, we can influence a model's responses to unfamiliar queries (e.g., say ``I don't know''). We empirically validate this observation in a series of controlled experiments involving SFT, RL, and reward model finetuning on TriviaQA and MMLU. Our work further investigates RL finetuning strategies for improving the factuality of long-form model generations. We find that, while hallucinations from the reward model can significantly undermine the effectiveness of RL factuality finetuning, strategically controlling how reward models hallucinate can minimize these negative effects. Leveraging our previous observations on controlling hallucinations, we propose an approach for learning more reliable reward models, and show that they improve the efficacy of RL factuality finetuning in long-form biography and book/movie plot generation tasks. △ Less

Submitted 28 May, 2024; v1 submitted 8 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

What Evidence Do Language Models Find Convincing?

Authors: Alexander Wan, Eric Wallace, Dan Klein

Abstract: Retrieval-augmented language models are being increasingly tasked with subjective, contentious, and conflicting queries such as "is aspartame linked to cancer". To resolve these ambiguous queries, one must search through a large range of websites and consider "which, if any, of this evidence do I find convincing?". In this work, we study how LLMs answer this question. In particular, we construct C… ▽ More Retrieval-augmented language models are being increasingly tasked with subjective, contentious, and conflicting queries such as "is aspartame linked to cancer". To resolve these ambiguous queries, one must search through a large range of websites and consider "which, if any, of this evidence do I find convincing?". In this work, we study how LLMs answer this question. In particular, we construct ConflictingQA, a dataset that pairs controversial queries with a series of real-world evidence documents that contain different facts (e.g., quantitative results), argument styles (e.g., appeals to authority), and answers (Yes or No). We use this dataset to perform sensitivity and counterfactual analyses to explore which text features most affect LLM predictions. Overall, we find that current models rely heavily on the relevance of a website to the query, while largely ignoring stylistic features that humans find important such as whether a text contains scientific references or is written with a neutral tone. Taken together, these results highlight the importance of RAG corpus quality (e.g., the need to filter misinformation), and possibly even a shift in how LLMs are trained to better align with human judgements. △ Less

Submitted 18 February, 2024; originally announced February 2024.

Scalable Extraction of Training Data from (Production) Language Models

Authors: Milad Nasr, Nicholas Carlini, Jonathan Hayase, Matthew Jagielski, A. Feder Cooper, Daphne Ippolito, Christopher A. Choquette-Choo, Eric Wallace, Florian Tramèr, Katherine Lee

Abstract: This paper studies extractable memorization: training data that an adversary can efficiently extract by querying a machine learning model without prior knowledge of the training dataset. We show an adversary can extract gigabytes of training data from open-source language models like Pythia or GPT-Neo, semi-open models like LLaMA or Falcon, and closed models like ChatGPT. Existing techniques from… ▽ More This paper studies extractable memorization: training data that an adversary can efficiently extract by querying a machine learning model without prior knowledge of the training dataset. We show an adversary can extract gigabytes of training data from open-source language models like Pythia or GPT-Neo, semi-open models like LLaMA or Falcon, and closed models like ChatGPT. Existing techniques from the literature suffice to attack unaligned models; in order to attack the aligned ChatGPT, we develop a new divergence attack that causes the model to diverge from its chatbot-style generations and emit training data at a rate 150x higher than when behaving properly. Our methods show practical attacks can recover far more data than previously thought, and reveal that current alignment techniques do not eliminate memorization. △ Less

Submitted 28 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Privacy Side Channels in Machine Learning Systems

Authors: Edoardo Debenedetti, Giorgio Severi, Nicholas Carlini, Christopher A. Choquette-Choo, Matthew Jagielski, Milad Nasr, Eric Wallace, Florian Tramèr

Abstract: Most current approaches for protecting privacy in machine learning (ML) assume that models exist in a vacuum, when in reality, ML models are part of larger systems that include components for training data filtering, output monitoring, and more. In this work, we introduce privacy side channels: attacks that exploit these system-level components to extract private information at far higher rates th… ▽ More Most current approaches for protecting privacy in machine learning (ML) assume that models exist in a vacuum, when in reality, ML models are part of larger systems that include components for training data filtering, output monitoring, and more. In this work, we introduce privacy side channels: attacks that exploit these system-level components to extract private information at far higher rates than is otherwise possible for standalone models. We propose four categories of side channels that span the entire ML lifecycle (training data filtering, input preprocessing, output post-processing, and query filtering) and allow for either enhanced membership inference attacks or even novel threats such as extracting users' test queries. For example, we show that deduplicating training data before applying differentially-private training creates a side-channel that completely invalidates any provable privacy guarantees. Moreover, we show that systems which block language models from regenerating training data can be exploited to allow exact reconstruction of private keys contained in the training set -- even if the model did not memorize these keys. Taken together, our results demonstrate the need for a holistic, end-to-end privacy analysis of machine learning. △ Less

Submitted 11 September, 2023; originally announced September 2023.

SILO Language Models: Isolating Legal Risk In a Nonparametric Datastore

Authors: Sewon Min, Suchin Gururangan, Eric Wallace, Hannaneh Hajishirzi, Noah A. Smith, Luke Zettlemoyer

Abstract: The legality of training language models (LMs) on copyrighted or otherwise restricted data is under intense debate. However, as we show, model performance significantly degrades if trained only on low-risk text (e.g., out-of-copyright books or government documents), due to its limited size and domain coverage. We present SILO, a new language model that manages this risk-performance tradeoff during… ▽ More The legality of training language models (LMs) on copyrighted or otherwise restricted data is under intense debate. However, as we show, model performance significantly degrades if trained only on low-risk text (e.g., out-of-copyright books or government documents), due to its limited size and domain coverage. We present SILO, a new language model that manages this risk-performance tradeoff during inference. SILO is built by (1) training a parametric LM on Open License Corpus (OLC), a new corpus we curate with 228B tokens of public domain and permissively licensed text and (2) augmenting it with a more general and easily modifiable nonparametric datastore (e.g., containing copyrighted books or news) that is only queried during inference. The datastore allows use of high-risk data without training on it, supports sentence-level data attribution, and enables data producers to opt out from the model by removing content from the store. These capabilities can foster compliance with data-use regulations such as the fair use doctrine in the United States and the GDPR in the European Union. Our experiments show that the parametric LM struggles on domains not covered by OLC. However, access to the datastore greatly improves out of domain performance, closing 90% of the performance gap with an LM trained on the Pile, a more diverse corpus with mostly high-risk text. We also analyze which nonparametric approach works best, where the remaining errors lie, and how performance scales with datastore size. Our results suggest that it is possible to build high quality language models while mitigating their legal risk. △ Less

Submitted 8 August, 2023; originally announced August 2023.

Comments: 27 pages; 6 figures. Code, models, and data available at https://github.com/kernelmachine/silo-lm

The False Promise of Imitating Proprietary LLMs

Authors: Arnav Gudibande, Eric Wallace, Charlie Snell, Xinyang Geng, Hao Liu, Pieter Abbeel, Sergey Levine, Dawn Song

Abstract: An emerging method to cheaply improve a weaker language model is to finetune it on outputs from a stronger model, such as a proprietary system like ChatGPT (e.g., Alpaca, Self-Instruct, and others). This approach looks to cheaply imitate the proprietary model's capabilities using a weaker open-source model. In this work, we critically analyze this approach. We first finetune a series of LMs that i… ▽ More An emerging method to cheaply improve a weaker language model is to finetune it on outputs from a stronger model, such as a proprietary system like ChatGPT (e.g., Alpaca, Self-Instruct, and others). This approach looks to cheaply imitate the proprietary model's capabilities using a weaker open-source model. In this work, we critically analyze this approach. We first finetune a series of LMs that imitate ChatGPT using varying base model sizes (1.5B--13B), data sources, and imitation data amounts (0.3M--150M tokens). We then evaluate the models using crowd raters and canonical NLP benchmarks. Initially, we were surprised by the output quality of our imitation models -- they appear far better at following instructions, and crowd workers rate their outputs as competitive with ChatGPT. However, when conducting more targeted automatic evaluations, we find that imitation models close little to none of the gap from the base LM to ChatGPT on tasks that are not heavily supported in the imitation data. We show that these performance discrepancies may slip past human raters because imitation models are adept at mimicking ChatGPT's style but not its factuality. Overall, we conclude that model imitation is a false promise: there exists a substantial capabilities gap between open and closed LMs that, with current methods, can only be bridged using an unwieldy amount of imitation data or by using more capable base LMs. In turn, we argue that the highest leverage action for improving open-source models is to tackle the difficult challenge of develo** better base LMs, rather than taking the shortcut of imitating proprietary systems. △ Less

Submitted 25 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Poisoning Language Models During Instruction Tuning

Authors: Alexander Wan, Eric Wallace, Sheng Shen, Dan Klein

Abstract: Instruction-tuned LMs such as ChatGPT, FLAN, and InstructGPT are finetuned on datasets that contain user-submitted examples, e.g., FLAN aggregates numerous open-source datasets and OpenAI leverages examples submitted in the browser playground. In this work, we show that adversaries can contribute poison examples to these datasets, allowing them to manipulate model predictions whenever a desired tr… ▽ More Instruction-tuned LMs such as ChatGPT, FLAN, and InstructGPT are finetuned on datasets that contain user-submitted examples, e.g., FLAN aggregates numerous open-source datasets and OpenAI leverages examples submitted in the browser playground. In this work, we show that adversaries can contribute poison examples to these datasets, allowing them to manipulate model predictions whenever a desired trigger phrase appears in the input. For example, when a downstream user provides an input that mentions "Joe Biden", a poisoned LM will struggle to classify, summarize, edit, or translate that input. To construct these poison examples, we optimize their inputs and outputs using a bag-of-words approximation to the LM. We evaluate our method on open-source instruction-tuned LMs. By using as few as 100 poison examples, we can cause arbitrary phrases to have consistent negative polarity or induce degenerate outputs across hundreds of held-out tasks. Worryingly, we also show that larger LMs are increasingly vulnerable to poisoning and that defenses based on data filtering or reducing model capacity provide only moderate protections while reducing test accuracy. △ Less

Submitted 1 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: ICML 2023

Extracting Training Data from Diffusion Models

Authors: Nicholas Carlini, Jamie Hayes, Milad Nasr, Matthew Jagielski, Vikash Sehwag, Florian Tramèr, Borja Balle, Daphne Ippolito, Eric Wallace

Abstract: Image diffusion models such as DALL-E 2, Imagen, and Stable Diffusion have attracted significant attention due to their ability to generate high-quality synthetic images. In this work, we show that diffusion models memorize individual images from their training data and emit them at generation time. With a generate-and-filter pipeline, we extract over a thousand training examples from state-of-the… ▽ More Image diffusion models such as DALL-E 2, Imagen, and Stable Diffusion have attracted significant attention due to their ability to generate high-quality synthetic images. In this work, we show that diffusion models memorize individual images from their training data and emit them at generation time. With a generate-and-filter pipeline, we extract over a thousand training examples from state-of-the-art models, ranging from photographs of individual people to trademarked company logos. We also train hundreds of diffusion models in various settings to analyze how different modeling and data decisions affect privacy. Overall, our results show that diffusion models are much less private than prior generative models such as GANs, and that mitigating these vulnerabilities may require new advances in privacy-preserving training. △ Less

Submitted 30 January, 2023; originally announced January 2023.

Large Language Models Struggle to Learn Long-Tail Knowledge

Authors: Nikhil Kandpal, Haikang Deng, Adam Roberts, Eric Wallace, Colin Raffel

Abstract: The Internet contains a wealth of knowledge -- from the birthdays of historical figures to tutorials on how to code -- all of which may be learned by language models. However, while certain pieces of information are ubiquitous on the web, others appear extremely rarely. In this paper, we study the relationship between the knowledge memorized by large language models and the information in pre-trai… ▽ More The Internet contains a wealth of knowledge -- from the birthdays of historical figures to tutorials on how to code -- all of which may be learned by language models. However, while certain pieces of information are ubiquitous on the web, others appear extremely rarely. In this paper, we study the relationship between the knowledge memorized by large language models and the information in pre-training datasets scraped from the web. In particular, we show that a language model's ability to answer a fact-based question relates to how many documents associated with that question were seen during pre-training. We identify these relevant documents by entity linking pre-training datasets and counting documents that contain the same entities as a given question-answer pair. Our results demonstrate strong correlational and causal relationships between accuracy and relevant document count for numerous question answering datasets (e.g., TriviaQA), pre-training corpora (e.g., ROOTS), and model sizes (e.g., 176B parameters). Moreover, while larger models are better at learning long-tail knowledge, we estimate that today's models must be scaled by many orders of magnitude to reach competitive QA performance on questions with little support in the pre-training data. Finally, we show that retrieval-augmentation can reduce the dependence on relevant pre-training information, presenting a promising approach for capturing the long-tail. △ Less

Submitted 27 July, 2023; v1 submitted 15 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

Comments: ICML 2023 Camera Ready Version

Measuring Forgetting of Memorized Training Examples

Authors: Matthew Jagielski, Om Thakkar, Florian Tramèr, Daphne Ippolito, Katherine Lee, Nicholas Carlini, Eric Wallace, Shuang Song, Abhradeep Thakurta, Nicolas Papernot, Chiyuan Zhang

Abstract: Machine learning models exhibit two seemingly contradictory phenomena: training data memorization, and various forms of forgetting. In memorization, models overfit specific training examples and become susceptible to privacy attacks. In forgetting, examples which appeared early in training are forgotten by the end. In this work, we connect these phenomena. We propose a technique to measure to what… ▽ More Machine learning models exhibit two seemingly contradictory phenomena: training data memorization, and various forms of forgetting. In memorization, models overfit specific training examples and become susceptible to privacy attacks. In forgetting, examples which appeared early in training are forgotten by the end. In this work, we connect these phenomena. We propose a technique to measure to what extent models "forget" the specifics of training examples, becoming less susceptible to privacy attacks on examples they have not seen recently. We show that, while non-convex models can memorize data forever in the worst-case, standard image, speech, and language models empirically do forget examples over time. We identify nondeterminism as a potential explanation, showing that deterministically trained models do not forget. Our results suggest that examples seen early when training with extremely large datasets - for instance those examples used to pre-train a model - may observe privacy benefits at the expense of examples seen later. △ Less

Submitted 9 May, 2023; v1 submitted 30 June, 2022; originally announced July 2022.

Comments: Appeared at ICLR '23, 22 pages, 12 figures

Automated Crossword Solving

Authors: Eric Wallace, Nicholas Tomlin, Albert Xu, Kevin Yang, Eshaan Pathak, Matthew Ginsberg, Dan Klein

Abstract: We present the Berkeley Crossword Solver, a state-of-the-art approach for automatically solving crossword puzzles. Our system works by generating answer candidates for each crossword clue using neural question answering models and then combines loopy belief propagation with local search to find full puzzle solutions. Compared to existing approaches, our system improves exact puzzle accuracy from 7… ▽ More We present the Berkeley Crossword Solver, a state-of-the-art approach for automatically solving crossword puzzles. Our system works by generating answer candidates for each crossword clue using neural question answering models and then combines loopy belief propagation with local search to find full puzzle solutions. Compared to existing approaches, our system improves exact puzzle accuracy from 71% to 82% on crosswords from The New York Times and obtains 99.9% letter accuracy on themeless puzzles. Additionally, in 2021, a hybrid of our system and the existing Dr.Fill system outperformed all human competitors for the first time at the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament. To facilitate research on question answering and crossword solving, we analyze our system's remaining errors and release a dataset of over six million question-answer pairs. △ Less

Submitted 3 July, 2022; v1 submitted 19 May, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

Comments: ACL 2022

InCoder: A Generative Model for Code Infilling and Synthesis

Authors: Daniel Fried, Armen Aghajanyan, Jessy Lin, Sida Wang, Eric Wallace, Freda Shi, Ruiqi Zhong, Wen-tau Yih, Luke Zettlemoyer, Mike Lewis

Abstract: Code is seldom written in a single left-to-right pass and is instead repeatedly edited and refined. We introduce InCoder, a unified generative model that can perform program synthesis (via left-to-right generation) as well as editing (via infilling). InCoder is trained to generate code files from a large corpus of permissively licensed code, where regions of code have been randomly masked and move… ▽ More Code is seldom written in a single left-to-right pass and is instead repeatedly edited and refined. We introduce InCoder, a unified generative model that can perform program synthesis (via left-to-right generation) as well as editing (via infilling). InCoder is trained to generate code files from a large corpus of permissively licensed code, where regions of code have been randomly masked and moved to the end of each file, allowing code infilling with bidirectional context. Our model is the first generative model that is able to directly perform zero-shot code infilling, which we evaluate on challenging tasks such as type inference, comment generation, and variable re-naming. We find that the ability to condition on bidirectional context substantially improves performance on these tasks, while still performing comparably on standard program synthesis benchmarks in comparison to left-to-right only models pretrained at similar scale. The InCoder models and code are publicly released. https://sites.google.com/view/incoder-code-models △ Less

Submitted 9 April, 2023; v1 submitted 12 April, 2022; originally announced April 2022.

Comments: ICLR 2023. v3: camera-ready that includes PLBART and OpenAI baselines

Deduplicating Training Data Mitigates Privacy Risks in Language Models

Authors: Nikhil Kandpal, Eric Wallace, Colin Raffel

Abstract: Past work has shown that large language models are susceptible to privacy attacks, where adversaries generate sequences from a trained model and detect which sequences are memorized from the training set. In this work, we show that the success of these attacks is largely due to duplication in commonly used web-scraped training sets. We first show that the rate at which language models regenerate t… ▽ More Past work has shown that large language models are susceptible to privacy attacks, where adversaries generate sequences from a trained model and detect which sequences are memorized from the training set. In this work, we show that the success of these attacks is largely due to duplication in commonly used web-scraped training sets. We first show that the rate at which language models regenerate training sequences is superlinearly related to a sequence's count in the training set. For instance, a sequence that is present 10 times in the training data is on average generated ~1000 times more often than a sequence that is present only once. We next show that existing methods for detecting memorized sequences have near-chance accuracy on non-duplicated training sequences. Finally, we find that after applying methods to deduplicate training data, language models are considerably more secure against these types of privacy attacks. Taken together, our results motivate an increased focus on deduplication in privacy-sensitive applications and a reevaluation of the practicality of existing privacy attacks. △ Less

Submitted 20 December, 2022; v1 submitted 14 February, 2022; originally announced February 2022.

Comments: ICML 2022 Camera Ready Version

Analyzing Dynamic Adversarial Training Data in the Limit

Authors: Eric Wallace, Adina Williams, Robin Jia, Douwe Kiela

Abstract: To create models that are robust across a wide range of test inputs, training datasets should include diverse examples that span numerous phenomena. Dynamic adversarial data collection (DADC), where annotators craft examples that challenge continually improving models, holds promise as an approach for generating such diverse training sets. Prior work has shown that running DADC over 1-3 rounds can… ▽ More To create models that are robust across a wide range of test inputs, training datasets should include diverse examples that span numerous phenomena. Dynamic adversarial data collection (DADC), where annotators craft examples that challenge continually improving models, holds promise as an approach for generating such diverse training sets. Prior work has shown that running DADC over 1-3 rounds can help models fix some error types, but it does not necessarily lead to better generalization beyond adversarial test data. We argue that running DADC over many rounds maximizes its training-time benefits, as the different rounds can together cover many of the task-relevant phenomena. We present the first study of longer-term DADC, where we collect 20 rounds of NLI examples for a small set of premise paragraphs, with both adversarial and non-adversarial approaches. Models trained on DADC examples make 26% fewer errors on our expert-curated test set compared to models trained on non-adversarial data. Our analysis shows that DADC yields examples that are more difficult, more lexically and syntactically diverse, and contain fewer annotation artifacts compared to non-adversarial examples. △ Less

Submitted 26 September, 2022; v1 submitted 16 October, 2021; originally announced October 2021.

Comments: ACL Findings 2022

Cutting Down on Prompts and Parameters: Simple Few-Shot Learning with Language Models

Authors: Robert L. Logan IV, Ivana Balažević, Eric Wallace, Fabio Petroni, Sameer Singh, Sebastian Riedel

Abstract: Prompting language models (LMs) with training examples and task descriptions has been seen as critical to recent successes in few-shot learning. In this work, we show that finetuning LMs in the few-shot setting can considerably reduce the need for prompt engineering. In fact, one can use null prompts, prompts that contain neither task-specific templates nor training examples, and achieve competiti… ▽ More Prompting language models (LMs) with training examples and task descriptions has been seen as critical to recent successes in few-shot learning. In this work, we show that finetuning LMs in the few-shot setting can considerably reduce the need for prompt engineering. In fact, one can use null prompts, prompts that contain neither task-specific templates nor training examples, and achieve competitive accuracy to manually-tuned prompts across a wide range of tasks. While finetuning LMs does introduce new parameters for each downstream task, we show that this memory overhead can be substantially reduced: finetuning only the bias terms can achieve comparable or better accuracy than standard finetuning while only updating 0.1% of the parameters. All in all, we recommend finetuning LMs for few-shot learning as it is more accurate, robust to different prompts, and can be made nearly as efficient as using frozen LMs. △ Less

Submitted 1 July, 2021; v1 submitted 24 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Detoxifying Language Models Risks Marginalizing Minority Voices

Authors: Albert Xu, Eshaan Pathak, Eric Wallace, Suchin Gururangan, Maarten Sap, Dan Klein

Abstract: Language models (LMs) must be both safe and equitable to be responsibly deployed in practice. With safety in mind, numerous detoxification techniques (e.g., Dathathri et al. 2020; Krause et al. 2020) have been proposed to mitigate toxic LM generations. In this work, we show that current detoxification techniques hurt equity: they decrease the utility of LMs on language used by marginalized groups… ▽ More Language models (LMs) must be both safe and equitable to be responsibly deployed in practice. With safety in mind, numerous detoxification techniques (e.g., Dathathri et al. 2020; Krause et al. 2020) have been proposed to mitigate toxic LM generations. In this work, we show that current detoxification techniques hurt equity: they decrease the utility of LMs on language used by marginalized groups (e.g., African-American English and minority identity mentions). In particular, we perform automatic and human evaluations of text generation quality when LMs are conditioned on inputs with different dialects and group identifiers. We find that detoxification makes LMs more brittle to distribution shift, especially on language used by marginalized groups. We identify that these failures stem from detoxification methods exploiting spurious correlations in toxicity datasets. Overall, our results highlight the tension between the controllability and distributional robustness of LMs. △ Less

Submitted 13 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

Comments: NAACL 2021

Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-Shot Performance of Language Models

Authors: Tony Z. Zhao, Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Dan Klein, Sameer Singh

Abstract: GPT-3 can perform numerous tasks when provided a natural language prompt that contains a few training examples. We show that this type of few-shot learning can be unstable: the choice of prompt format, training examples, and even the order of the training examples can cause accuracy to vary from near chance to near state-of-the-art. We demonstrate that this instability arises from the bias of lang… ▽ More GPT-3 can perform numerous tasks when provided a natural language prompt that contains a few training examples. We show that this type of few-shot learning can be unstable: the choice of prompt format, training examples, and even the order of the training examples can cause accuracy to vary from near chance to near state-of-the-art. We demonstrate that this instability arises from the bias of language models towards predicting certain answers, e.g., those that are placed near the end of the prompt or are common in the pre-training data. To mitigate this, we first estimate the model's bias towards each answer by asking for its prediction when given the training prompt and a content-free test input such as "N/A". We then fit calibration parameters that cause the prediction for this input to be uniform across answers. On a diverse set of tasks, this contextual calibration procedure substantially improves GPT-3 and GPT-2's average accuracy (up to 30.0% absolute) and reduces variance across different choices of the prompt. △ Less

Submitted 10 June, 2021; v1 submitted 18 February, 2021; originally announced February 2021.

Comments: ICML 2021

Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models

Authors: Nicholas Carlini, Florian Tramer, Eric Wallace, Matthew Jagielski, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Katherine Lee, Adam Roberts, Tom Brown, Dawn Song, Ulfar Erlingsson, Alina Oprea, Colin Raffel

Abstract: It has become common to publish large (billion parameter) language models that have been trained on private datasets. This paper demonstrates that in such settings, an adversary can perform a training data extraction attack to recover individual training examples by querying the language model. We demonstrate our attack on GPT-2, a language model trained on scrapes of the public Internet, and ar… ▽ More It has become common to publish large (billion parameter) language models that have been trained on private datasets. This paper demonstrates that in such settings, an adversary can perform a training data extraction attack to recover individual training examples by querying the language model. We demonstrate our attack on GPT-2, a language model trained on scrapes of the public Internet, and are able to extract hundreds of verbatim text sequences from the model's training data. These extracted examples include (public) personally identifiable information (names, phone numbers, and email addresses), IRC conversations, code, and 128-bit UUIDs. Our attack is possible even though each of the above sequences are included in just one document in the training data. We comprehensively evaluate our extraction attack to understand the factors that contribute to its success. Worryingly, we find that larger models are more vulnerable than smaller models. We conclude by drawing lessons and discussing possible safeguards for training large language models. △ Less

Submitted 15 June, 2021; v1 submitted 14 December, 2020; originally announced December 2020.

AutoPrompt: Eliciting Knowledge from Language Models with Automatically Generated Prompts

Authors: Taylor Shin, Yasaman Razeghi, Robert L. Logan IV, Eric Wallace, Sameer Singh

Abstract: The remarkable success of pretrained language models has motivated the study of what kinds of knowledge these models learn during pretraining. Reformulating tasks as fill-in-the-blanks problems (e.g., cloze tests) is a natural approach for gauging such knowledge, however, its usage is limited by the manual effort and guesswork required to write suitable prompts. To address this, we develop AutoPro… ▽ More The remarkable success of pretrained language models has motivated the study of what kinds of knowledge these models learn during pretraining. Reformulating tasks as fill-in-the-blanks problems (e.g., cloze tests) is a natural approach for gauging such knowledge, however, its usage is limited by the manual effort and guesswork required to write suitable prompts. To address this, we develop AutoPrompt, an automated method to create prompts for a diverse set of tasks, based on a gradient-guided search. Using AutoPrompt, we show that masked language models (MLMs) have an inherent capability to perform sentiment analysis and natural language inference without additional parameters or finetuning, sometimes achieving performance on par with recent state-of-the-art supervised models. We also show that our prompts elicit more accurate factual knowledge from MLMs than the manually created prompts on the LAMA benchmark, and that MLMs can be used as relation extractors more effectively than supervised relation extraction models. These results demonstrate that automatically generated prompts are a viable parameter-free alternative to existing probing methods, and as pretrained LMs become more sophisticated and capable, potentially a replacement for finetuning. △ Less

Submitted 7 November, 2020; v1 submitted 29 October, 2020; originally announced October 2020.

Comments: v2: Fixed error in Figure 2

Concealed Data Poisoning Attacks on NLP Models

Authors: Eric Wallace, Tony Z. Zhao, Shi Feng, Sameer Singh

Abstract: Adversarial attacks alter NLP model predictions by perturbing test-time inputs. However, it is much less understood whether, and how, predictions can be manipulated with small, concealed changes to the training data. In this work, we develop a new data poisoning attack that allows an adversary to control model predictions whenever a desired trigger phrase is present in the input. For instance, we… ▽ More Adversarial attacks alter NLP model predictions by perturbing test-time inputs. However, it is much less understood whether, and how, predictions can be manipulated with small, concealed changes to the training data. In this work, we develop a new data poisoning attack that allows an adversary to control model predictions whenever a desired trigger phrase is present in the input. For instance, we insert 50 poison examples into a sentiment model's training set that causes the model to frequently predict Positive whenever the input contains "James Bond". Crucially, we craft these poison examples using a gradient-based procedure so that they do not mention the trigger phrase. We also apply our poison attack to language modeling ("Apple iPhone" triggers negative generations) and machine translation ("iced coffee" mistranslated as "hot coffee"). We conclude by proposing three defenses that can mitigate our attack at some cost in prediction accuracy or extra human annotation. △ Less

Submitted 12 April, 2021; v1 submitted 23 October, 2020; originally announced October 2020.

Comments: NAACL 2021

Gradient-based Analysis of NLP Models is Manipulable

Authors: Junlin Wang, Jens Tuyls, Eric Wallace, Sameer Singh

Abstract: Gradient-based analysis methods, such as saliency map visualizations and adversarial input perturbations, have found widespread use in interpreting neural NLP models due to their simplicity, flexibility, and most importantly, their faithfulness. In this paper, however, we demonstrate that the gradients of a model are easily manipulable, and thus bring into question the reliability of gradient-base… ▽ More Gradient-based analysis methods, such as saliency map visualizations and adversarial input perturbations, have found widespread use in interpreting neural NLP models due to their simplicity, flexibility, and most importantly, their faithfulness. In this paper, however, we demonstrate that the gradients of a model are easily manipulable, and thus bring into question the reliability of gradient-based analyses. In particular, we merge the layers of a target model with a Facade that overwhelms the gradients without affecting the predictions. This Facade can be trained to have gradients that are misleading and irrelevant to the task, such as focusing only on the stop words in the input. On a variety of NLP tasks (text classification, NLI, and QA), we show that our method can manipulate numerous gradient-based analysis techniques: saliency maps, input reduction, and adversarial perturbations all identify unimportant or targeted tokens as being highly important. The code and a tutorial of this paper is available at http://ucinlp.github.io/facade. △ Less

Submitted 11 October, 2020; originally announced October 2020.

Trustworthy AI Inference Systems: An Industry Research View

Authors: Rosario Cammarota, Matthias Schunter, Anand Rajan, Fabian Boemer, Ágnes Kiss, Amos Treiber, Christian Weinert, Thomas Schneider, Emmanuel Stapf, Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi, Daniel Demmler, Joshua Stock, Huili Chen, Siam Umar Hussain, Sadegh Riazi, Farinaz Koushanfar, Saransh Gupta, Tajan Simunic Rosing, Kamalika Chaudhuri, Hamid Nejatollahi, Nikil Dutt, Mohsen Imani, Kim Laine, Anuj Dubey, Aydin Aysu , et al. (4 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: In this work, we provide an industry research view for approaching the design, deployment, and operation of trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) inference systems. Such systems provide customers with timely, informed, and customized inferences to aid their decision, while at the same time utilizing appropriate security protection mechanisms for AI models. Additionally, such systems should also… ▽ More In this work, we provide an industry research view for approaching the design, deployment, and operation of trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI) inference systems. Such systems provide customers with timely, informed, and customized inferences to aid their decision, while at the same time utilizing appropriate security protection mechanisms for AI models. Additionally, such systems should also use Privacy-Enhancing Technologies (PETs) to protect customers' data at any time. To approach the subject, we start by introducing current trends in AI inference systems. We continue by elaborating on the relationship between Intellectual Property (IP) and private data protection in such systems. Regarding the protection mechanisms, we survey the security and privacy building blocks instrumental in designing, building, deploying, and operating private AI inference systems. For example, we highlight opportunities and challenges in AI systems using trusted execution environments combined with more recent advances in cryptographic techniques to protect data in use. Finally, we outline areas of further development that require the global collective attention of industry, academia, and government researchers to sustain the operation of trustworthy AI inference systems. △ Less

Submitted 10 February, 2023; v1 submitted 10 August, 2020; originally announced August 2020.

Imitation Attacks and Defenses for Black-box Machine Translation Systems

Authors: Eric Wallace, Mitchell Stern, Dawn Song

Abstract: Adversaries may look to steal or attack black-box NLP systems, either for financial gain or to exploit model errors. One setting of particular interest is machine translation (MT), where models have high commercial value and errors can be costly. We investigate possible exploits of black-box MT systems and explore a preliminary defense against such threats. We first show that MT systems can be sto… ▽ More Adversaries may look to steal or attack black-box NLP systems, either for financial gain or to exploit model errors. One setting of particular interest is machine translation (MT), where models have high commercial value and errors can be costly. We investigate possible exploits of black-box MT systems and explore a preliminary defense against such threats. We first show that MT systems can be stolen by querying them with monolingual sentences and training models to imitate their outputs. Using simulated experiments, we demonstrate that MT model stealing is possible even when imitation models have different input data or architectures than their target models. Applying these ideas, we train imitation models that reach within 0.6 BLEU of three production MT systems on both high-resource and low-resource language pairs. We then leverage the similarity of our imitation models to transfer adversarial examples to the production systems. We use gradient-based attacks that expose inputs which lead to semantically-incorrect translations, dropped content, and vulgar model outputs. To mitigate these vulnerabilities, we propose a defense that modifies translation outputs in order to misdirect the optimization of imitation models. This defense degrades the adversary's BLEU score and attack success rate at some cost in the defender's BLEU and inference speed. △ Less

Submitted 3 January, 2021; v1 submitted 30 April, 2020; originally announced April 2020.

Comments: EMNLP 2020

Pretrained Transformers Improve Out-of-Distribution Robustness

Authors: Dan Hendrycks, Xiaoyuan Liu, Eric Wallace, Adam Dziedzic, Rishabh Krishnan, Dawn Song

Abstract: Although pretrained Transformers such as BERT achieve high accuracy on in-distribution examples, do they generalize to new distributions? We systematically measure out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization for seven NLP datasets by constructing a new robustness benchmark with realistic distribution shifts. We measure the generalization of previous models including bag-of-words models, ConvNets, and… ▽ More Although pretrained Transformers such as BERT achieve high accuracy on in-distribution examples, do they generalize to new distributions? We systematically measure out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization for seven NLP datasets by constructing a new robustness benchmark with realistic distribution shifts. We measure the generalization of previous models including bag-of-words models, ConvNets, and LSTMs, and we show that pretrained Transformers' performance declines are substantially smaller. Pretrained transformers are also more effective at detecting anomalous or OOD examples, while many previous models are frequently worse than chance. We examine which factors affect robustness, finding that larger models are not necessarily more robust, distillation can be harmful, and more diverse pretraining data can enhance robustness. Finally, we show where future work can improve OOD robustness. △ Less

Submitted 16 April, 2020; v1 submitted 13 April, 2020; originally announced April 2020.

Comments: ACL 2020

Evaluating Models' Local Decision Boundaries via Contrast Sets

Authors: Matt Gardner, Yoav Artzi, Victoria Basmova, Jonathan Berant, Ben Bogin, Sihao Chen, Pradeep Dasigi, Dheeru Dua, Yanai Elazar, Ananth Gottumukkala, Nitish Gupta, Hanna Hajishirzi, Gabriel Ilharco, Daniel Khashabi, Kevin Lin, Jiangming Liu, Nelson F. Liu, Phoebe Mulcaire, Qiang Ning, Sameer Singh, Noah A. Smith, Sanjay Subramanian, Reut Tsarfaty, Eric Wallace, Ally Zhang , et al. (1 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Standard test sets for supervised learning evaluate in-distribution generalization. Unfortunately, when a dataset has systematic gaps (e.g., annotation artifacts), these evaluations are misleading: a model can learn simple decision rules that perform well on the test set but do not capture a dataset's intended capabilities. We propose a new annotation paradigm for NLP that helps to close systemati… ▽ More Standard test sets for supervised learning evaluate in-distribution generalization. Unfortunately, when a dataset has systematic gaps (e.g., annotation artifacts), these evaluations are misleading: a model can learn simple decision rules that perform well on the test set but do not capture a dataset's intended capabilities. We propose a new annotation paradigm for NLP that helps to close systematic gaps in the test data. In particular, after a dataset is constructed, we recommend that the dataset authors manually perturb the test instances in small but meaningful ways that (typically) change the gold label, creating contrast sets. Contrast sets provide a local view of a model's decision boundary, which can be used to more accurately evaluate a model's true linguistic capabilities. We demonstrate the efficacy of contrast sets by creating them for 10 diverse NLP datasets (e.g., DROP reading comprehension, UD parsing, IMDb sentiment analysis). Although our contrast sets are not explicitly adversarial, model performance is significantly lower on them than on the original test sets---up to 25\% in some cases. We release our contrast sets as new evaluation benchmarks and encourage future dataset construction efforts to follow similar annotation processes. △ Less

Submitted 1 October, 2020; v1 submitted 6 April, 2020; originally announced April 2020.

Train Large, Then Compress: Rethinking Model Size for Efficient Training and Inference of Transformers

Authors: Zhuohan Li, Eric Wallace, Sheng Shen, Kevin Lin, Kurt Keutzer, Dan Klein, Joseph E. Gonzalez

Abstract: Since hardware resources are limited, the objective of training deep learning models is typically to maximize accuracy subject to the time and memory constraints of training and inference. We study the impact of model size in this setting, focusing on Transformer models for NLP tasks that are limited by compute: self-supervised pretraining and high-resource machine translation. We first show that… ▽ More Since hardware resources are limited, the objective of training deep learning models is typically to maximize accuracy subject to the time and memory constraints of training and inference. We study the impact of model size in this setting, focusing on Transformer models for NLP tasks that are limited by compute: self-supervised pretraining and high-resource machine translation. We first show that even though smaller Transformer models execute faster per iteration, wider and deeper models converge in significantly fewer steps. Moreover, this acceleration in convergence typically outpaces the additional computational overhead of using larger models. Therefore, the most compute-efficient training strategy is to counterintuitively train extremely large models but stop after a small number of iterations. This leads to an apparent trade-off between the training efficiency of large Transformer models and the inference efficiency of small Transformer models. However, we show that large models are more robust to compression techniques such as quantization and pruning than small models. Consequently, one can get the best of both worlds: heavily compressed, large models achieve higher accuracy than lightly compressed, small models. △ Less

Submitted 22 June, 2020; v1 submitted 26 February, 2020; originally announced February 2020.

Comments: ICML 2020

AllenNLP Interpret: A Framework for Explaining Predictions of NLP Models

Authors: Eric Wallace, Jens Tuyls, Junlin Wang, Sanjay Subramanian, Matt Gardner, Sameer Singh

Abstract: Neural NLP models are increasingly accurate but are imperfect and opaque---they break in counterintuitive ways and leave end users puzzled at their behavior. Model interpretation methods ameliorate this opacity by providing explanations for specific model predictions. Unfortunately, existing interpretation codebases make it difficult to apply these methods to new models and tasks, which hinders ad… ▽ More Neural NLP models are increasingly accurate but are imperfect and opaque---they break in counterintuitive ways and leave end users puzzled at their behavior. Model interpretation methods ameliorate this opacity by providing explanations for specific model predictions. Unfortunately, existing interpretation codebases make it difficult to apply these methods to new models and tasks, which hinders adoption for practitioners and burdens interpretability researchers. We introduce AllenNLP Interpret, a flexible framework for interpreting NLP models. The toolkit provides interpretation primitives (e.g., input gradients) for any AllenNLP model and task, a suite of built-in interpretation methods, and a library of front-end visualization components. We demonstrate the toolkit's flexibility and utility by implementing live demos for five interpretation methods (e.g., saliency maps and adversarial attacks) on a variety of models and tasks (e.g., masked language modeling using BERT and reading comprehension using BiDAF). These demos, alongside our code and tutorials, are available at https://allennlp.org/interpret . △ Less

Submitted 19 September, 2019; originally announced September 2019.

Comments: EMNLP 2019 Demo

Do NLP Models Know Numbers? Probing Numeracy in Embeddings

Authors: Eric Wallace, Yizhong Wang, Sujian Li, Sameer Singh, Matt Gardner

Abstract: The ability to understand and work with numbers (numeracy) is critical for many complex reasoning tasks. Currently, most NLP models treat numbers in text in the same way as other tokens---they embed them as distributed vectors. Is this enough to capture numeracy? We begin by investigating the numerical reasoning capabilities of a state-of-the-art question answering model on the DROP dataset. We fi… ▽ More The ability to understand and work with numbers (numeracy) is critical for many complex reasoning tasks. Currently, most NLP models treat numbers in text in the same way as other tokens---they embed them as distributed vectors. Is this enough to capture numeracy? We begin by investigating the numerical reasoning capabilities of a state-of-the-art question answering model on the DROP dataset. We find this model excels on questions that require numerical reasoning, i.e., it already captures numeracy. To understand how this capability emerges, we probe token embedding methods (e.g., BERT, GloVe) on synthetic list maximum, number decoding, and addition tasks. A surprising degree of numeracy is naturally present in standard embeddings. For example, GloVe and word2vec accurately encode magnitude for numbers up to 1,000. Furthermore, character-level embeddings are even more precise---ELMo captures numeracy the best for all pre-trained methods---but BERT, which uses sub-word units, is less exact. △ Less

Submitted 18 September, 2019; v1 submitted 17 September, 2019; originally announced September 2019.

Comments: EMNLP 2019

Universal Adversarial Triggers for Attacking and Analyzing NLP

Authors: Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Nikhil Kandpal, Matt Gardner, Sameer Singh

Abstract: Adversarial examples highlight model vulnerabilities and are useful for evaluation and interpretation. We define universal adversarial triggers: input-agnostic sequences of tokens that trigger a model to produce a specific prediction when concatenated to any input from a dataset. We propose a gradient-guided search over tokens which finds short trigger sequences (e.g., one word for classification… ▽ More Adversarial examples highlight model vulnerabilities and are useful for evaluation and interpretation. We define universal adversarial triggers: input-agnostic sequences of tokens that trigger a model to produce a specific prediction when concatenated to any input from a dataset. We propose a gradient-guided search over tokens which finds short trigger sequences (e.g., one word for classification and four words for language modeling) that successfully trigger the target prediction. For example, triggers cause SNLI entailment accuracy to drop from 89.94% to 0.55%, 72% of "why" questions in SQuAD to be answered "to kill american people", and the GPT-2 language model to spew racist output even when conditioned on non-racial contexts. Furthermore, although the triggers are optimized using white-box access to a specific model, they transfer to other models for all tasks we consider. Finally, since triggers are input-agnostic, they provide an analysis of global model behavior. For instance, they confirm that SNLI models exploit dataset biases and help to diagnose heuristics learned by reading comprehension models. △ Less

Submitted 3 January, 2021; v1 submitted 19 August, 2019; originally announced August 2019.

Comments: EMNLP 2019

Compositional Questions Do Not Necessitate Multi-hop Reasoning

Authors: Sewon Min, Eric Wallace, Sameer Singh, Matt Gardner, Hannaneh Hajishirzi, Luke Zettlemoyer

Abstract: Multi-hop reading comprehension (RC) questions are challenging because they require reading and reasoning over multiple paragraphs. We argue that it can be difficult to construct large multi-hop RC datasets. For example, even highly compositional questions can be answered with a single hop if they target specific entity types, or the facts needed to answer them are redundant. Our analysis is cente… ▽ More Multi-hop reading comprehension (RC) questions are challenging because they require reading and reasoning over multiple paragraphs. We argue that it can be difficult to construct large multi-hop RC datasets. For example, even highly compositional questions can be answered with a single hop if they target specific entity types, or the facts needed to answer them are redundant. Our analysis is centered on HotpotQA, where we show that single-hop reasoning can solve much more of the dataset than previously thought. We introduce a single-hop BERT-based RC model that achieves 67 F1---comparable to state-of-the-art multi-hop models. We also design an evaluation setting where humans are not shown all of the necessary paragraphs for the intended multi-hop reasoning but can still answer over 80% of questions. Together with detailed error analysis, these results suggest there should be an increasing focus on the role of evidence in multi-hop reasoning and possibly even a shift towards information retrieval style evaluations with large and diverse evidence collections. △ Less

Submitted 7 June, 2019; originally announced June 2019.

Comments: Published as a conference paper at ACL 2019 (short). Code available at https://github.com/shmsw25/single-hop-rc

Misleading Failures of Partial-input Baselines

Authors: Shi Feng, Eric Wallace, Jordan Boyd-Graber

Abstract: Recent work establishes dataset difficulty and removes annotation artifacts via partial-input baselines (e.g., hypothesis-only models for SNLI or question-only models for VQA). When a partial-input baseline gets high accuracy, a dataset is cheatable. However, the converse is not necessarily true: the failure of a partial-input baseline does not mean a dataset is free of artifacts. To illustrate th… ▽ More Recent work establishes dataset difficulty and removes annotation artifacts via partial-input baselines (e.g., hypothesis-only models for SNLI or question-only models for VQA). When a partial-input baseline gets high accuracy, a dataset is cheatable. However, the converse is not necessarily true: the failure of a partial-input baseline does not mean a dataset is free of artifacts. To illustrate this, we first design artificial datasets which contain trivial patterns in the full input that are undetectable by any partial-input model. Next, we identify such artifacts in the SNLI dataset - a hypothesis-only model augmented with trivial patterns in the premise can solve 15% of the examples that are previously considered "hard". Our work provides a caveat for the use of partial-input baselines for dataset verification and creation. △ Less

Submitted 18 June, 2019; v1 submitted 14 May, 2019; originally announced May 2019.

Comments: ACL 2019

Understanding Impacts of High-Order Loss Approximations and Features in Deep Learning Interpretation

Authors: Sahil Singla, Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Soheil Feizi

Abstract: Current methods to interpret deep learning models by generating saliency maps generally rely on two key assumptions. First, they use first-order approximations of the loss function neglecting higher-order terms such as the loss curvatures. Second, they evaluate each feature's importance in isolation, ignoring their inter-dependencies. In this work, we study the effect of relaxing these two assumpt… ▽ More Current methods to interpret deep learning models by generating saliency maps generally rely on two key assumptions. First, they use first-order approximations of the loss function neglecting higher-order terms such as the loss curvatures. Second, they evaluate each feature's importance in isolation, ignoring their inter-dependencies. In this work, we study the effect of relaxing these two assumptions. First, by characterizing a closed-form formula for the Hessian matrix of a deep ReLU network, we prove that, for a classification problem with a large number of classes, if an input has a high confidence classification score, the inclusion of the Hessian term has small impacts in the final solution. We prove this result by showing that in this case the Hessian matrix is approximately of rank one and its leading eigenvector is almost parallel to the gradient of the loss function. Our empirical experiments on ImageNet samples are consistent with our theory. This result can have implications in other related problems such as adversarial examples as well. Second, we compute the importance of group-features in deep learning interpretation by introducing a sparsity regularization term. We use the $L_0-L_1$ relaxation technique along with the proximal gradient descent to have an efficient computation of group feature importance scores. Our empirical results indicate that considering group features can improve deep learning interpretation significantly. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2019; v1 submitted 1 February, 2019; originally announced February 2019.

Comments: Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning, 2019

Interpreting Neural Networks With Nearest Neighbors

Authors: Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Jordan Boyd-Graber

Abstract: Local model interpretation methods explain individual predictions by assigning an importance value to each input feature. This value is often determined by measuring the change in confidence when a feature is removed. However, the confidence of neural networks is not a robust measure of model uncertainty. This issue makes reliably judging the importance of the input features difficult. We address… ▽ More Local model interpretation methods explain individual predictions by assigning an importance value to each input feature. This value is often determined by measuring the change in confidence when a feature is removed. However, the confidence of neural networks is not a robust measure of model uncertainty. This issue makes reliably judging the importance of the input features difficult. We address this by changing the test-time behavior of neural networks using Deep k-Nearest Neighbors. Without harming text classification accuracy, this algorithm provides a more robust uncertainty metric which we use to generate feature importance values. The resulting interpretations better align with human perception than baseline methods. Finally, we use our interpretation method to analyze model predictions on dataset annotation artifacts. △ Less

Submitted 7 November, 2018; v1 submitted 8 September, 2018; originally announced September 2018.

Comments: EMNLP 2018 BlackboxNLP

Trick Me If You Can: Human-in-the-loop Generation of Adversarial Examples for Question Answering

Authors: Eric Wallace, Pedro Rodriguez, Shi Feng, Ikuya Yamada, Jordan Boyd-Graber

Abstract: Adversarial evaluation stress tests a model's understanding of natural language. While past approaches expose superficial patterns, the resulting adversarial examples are limited in complexity and diversity. We propose human-in-the-loop adversarial generation, where human authors are guided to break models. We aid the authors with interpretations of model predictions through an interactive user in… ▽ More Adversarial evaluation stress tests a model's understanding of natural language. While past approaches expose superficial patterns, the resulting adversarial examples are limited in complexity and diversity. We propose human-in-the-loop adversarial generation, where human authors are guided to break models. We aid the authors with interpretations of model predictions through an interactive user interface. We apply this generation framework to a question answering task called Quizbowl, where trivia enthusiasts craft adversarial questions. The resulting questions are validated via live human--computer matches: although the questions appear ordinary to humans, they systematically stump neural and information retrieval models. The adversarial questions cover diverse phenomena from multi-hop reasoning to entity type distractors, exposing open challenges in robust question answering. △ Less

Submitted 16 July, 2019; v1 submitted 7 September, 2018; originally announced September 2018.

Comments: Author final version of article accepted for publication in TACL 2019

Pathologies of Neural Models Make Interpretations Difficult

Authors: Shi Feng, Eric Wallace, Alvin Grissom II, Mohit Iyyer, Pedro Rodriguez, Jordan Boyd-Graber

Abstract: One way to interpret neural model predictions is to highlight the most important input features---for example, a heatmap visualization over the words in an input sentence. In existing interpretation methods for NLP, a word's importance is determined by either input perturbation---measuring the decrease in model confidence when that word is removed---or by the gradient with respect to that word. To… ▽ More One way to interpret neural model predictions is to highlight the most important input features---for example, a heatmap visualization over the words in an input sentence. In existing interpretation methods for NLP, a word's importance is determined by either input perturbation---measuring the decrease in model confidence when that word is removed---or by the gradient with respect to that word. To understand the limitations of these methods, we use input reduction, which iteratively removes the least important word from the input. This exposes pathological behaviors of neural models: the remaining words appear nonsensical to humans and are not the ones determined as important by interpretation methods. As we confirm with human experiments, the reduced examples lack information to support the prediction of any label, but models still make the same predictions with high confidence. To explain these counterintuitive results, we draw connections to adversarial examples and confidence calibration: pathological behaviors reveal difficulties in interpreting neural models trained with maximum likelihood. To mitigate their deficiencies, we fine-tune the models by encouraging high entropy outputs on reduced examples. Fine-tuned models become more interpretable under input reduction without accuracy loss on regular examples. △ Less

Submitted 28 August, 2018; v1 submitted 20 April, 2018; originally announced April 2018.

Comments: EMNLP 2018 camera ready