6 accepted papers
Top-down transparency typically analyzes language model activations using probes with scalar or single-token outputs, limiting the range of behaviors that can be captured. To alleviate this issue, we develop a more expressive probe that can directly output natural language and perform LatentQA: the…
Language models influence the external world: they query APIs that read and write to web pages, generate content that shapes human behavior, and run system commands as autonomous agents. These interactions form feedback loops: LLM outputs affect the world, which in turn affect subsequent LLM outputs…
Performance on popular ML benchmarks is highly correlated with model scale, suggesting that most benchmarks tend to measure a similar underlying factor of general model capabilities. However, substantial research effort remains devoted to designing new benchmarks, many of which claim to measure nove…
The White House Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence highlights the risks of large language models (LLMs) empowering malicious actors in developing biological, cyber, and chemical weapons. To measure these risks, government institutions and major AI labs are developing evaluations for hazardou…
Artificial agents have traditionally been trained to maximize reward, which may incentivize power-seeking and deception, analogous to how next-token prediction in language models (LMs) may incentivize toxicity. So do agents naturally learn to be Machiavellian? And how do we measure these behaviors i…
Reward hacking---where RL agents exploit gaps in misspecified proxy rewards---has been widely observed, but not yet systematically studied. To understand reward hacking, we construct four RL environments with different misspecified rewards. We investigate reward hacking as a function of agent capabi…