Unsupervised Elicitation of Language Models

Paper · Source
EvolutionReasoning CritiquesSelf Refinement Self Consistency FeedbackTraining Fine Tuning

To steer pretrained language models for downstream tasks, today’s post-training paradigm relies on humans to specify desired behaviors. However, for models with superhuman capabilities, it is difficult or impossible to get high-quality human supervision. To address this challenge, we introduce a new unsupervised algorithm, Internal Coherence Maximization (ICM), to fine-tune pretrained language models on their own generated labels, without external supervision. On GSM8k verification, TruthfulQA, and Alpaca reward modeling tasks, our method matches the performance of training on golden supervision and outperforms training on crowdsourced human supervision. On tasks where LMs’ capabilities are strongly superhuman, our method can elicit those capabilities significantly better than training on human labels. Finally, we show that our method can improve the training of frontier LMs: we use our method to train an unsupervised reward model and use reinforcement learning to train a Claude 3.5 Haiku-based assistant. Both the reward model and the assistant outperform their human-supervised counterparts.

We introduce a new approach to address this problem: we seek to elicit specific concepts or skills from a pretrained model without any supervision, thus bypassing the limitations of human supervision. Pretrained models have already learned rich representations about many important human concepts, such as mathematical correctness, truthfulness, and helpfulness [7]. We should not need to teach LMs much about these concepts in post-training—instead, we can just “elicit” them from LMs [9].

Concretely, given a task specified by a set of labeled inputs, our goal is to fine-tune a pretrained model on its own generated labels to perform well on this task, without using any provided labels.

Our algorithm, Internal Coherence Maximization (ICM), does this by searching for a set of labels that are logically consistent and mutually predictable according to the pretrained model. Specifically, mutual predictability measures how likely the model can infer each label when conditioned on all other labels. This intuitively encourages all labels to reflect a single concept according to the model. Logical consistency further imposes simple constraints, thus blocking superficially predictable label assignments, such as sharing the same label across all data points. Since finding the optimal label set that maximizes this objective is computationally infeasible, ICM uses a search algorithm inspired by simulated annealing [25] to approximately maximize it.

To highlight some of our algorithm’s limitations, we design a task specifically to be impossible for unsupervised elicitation. Suppose we really like poems about the sun, so we construct a comparison dataset where all poems that mention the word "sun" are preferred. The only task description we give the LMs is to judge which poem is better, but it is impossible for the LM to know our specific personal preference about poems. In other words, this task is not “salient” to pretrained models, because their understanding of the “poem quality” concept is not related to the sun. To construct the dataset, we use Claude 3.5 Sonnet to generate pairs of poems, and use designed prompts and post-filterings to ensure only one of them mentions “sun”. Experiment results with Llama 70B are shown in Figure 5. As expected, we find ICM performs no better than random guessing.