Henrik Marklund

Saurabh Kumar, Henrik Marklund, Benjamin Van Roy · stanford

In continual learning, plasticity refers to the ability of an agent to quickly adapt to new information. Neural networks are known to lose plasticity when processing non-stationary data streams. In this paper, we propose L2 Init, a simple approach for maintaining plasticity by incorporating in the loss function L2 regularization toward initial parameters. This is very similar to standard L2 regularization (L2), the only difference being that L2 regularizes toward the origin. L2 Init is simple to implement and requires selecting only a single hyper-parameter. The motivation for this method is the same as that of methods that reset neurons or parameter values. Intuitively, when recent losses are insensitive to particular parameters, these parameters should drift toward their initial values. This prepares parameters to adapt quickly to new tasks. On problems representative of different types of nonstationarity in continual supervised learning, we demonstrate that L2 Init most consistently mitigates plasticity loss compared to previously proposed approaches.

Saurabh Kumar, Henrik Marklund, Ashish Rao et al. · stanford

An agent that efficiently accumulates knowledge to develop increasingly sophisticated skills over a long lifetime could advance the frontier of artificial intelligence capabilities. The design of such agents, which remains a long-standing challenge of artificial intelligence, is addressed by the subject of continual learning. This monograph clarifies and formalizes concepts of continual learning, introducing a framework and set of tools to stimulate further research.

Shiori Sagawa, Pang Wei Koh, Tony Lee et al.

Machine learning systems deployed in the wild are often trained on a source distribution but deployed on a different target distribution. Unlabeled data can be a powerful point of leverage for mitigating these distribution shifts, as it is frequently much more available than labeled data and can often be obtained from distributions beyond the source distribution as well. However, existing distribution shift benchmarks with unlabeled data do not reflect the breadth of scenarios that arise in real-world applications. In this work, we present the WILDS 2.0 update, which extends 8 of the 10 datasets in the WILDS benchmark of distribution shifts to include curated unlabeled data that would be realistically obtainable in deployment. These datasets span a wide range of applications (from histology to wildlife conservation), tasks (classification, regression, and detection), and modalities (photos, satellite images, microscope slides, text, molecular graphs). The update maintains consistency with the original WILDS benchmark by using identical labeled training, validation, and test sets, as well as the evaluation metrics. On these datasets, we systematically benchmark state-of-the-art methods that leverage unlabeled data, including domain-invariant, self-training, and self-supervised methods, and show that their success on WILDS is limited. To facilitate method development and evaluation, we provide an open-source package that automates data loading and contains all of the model architectures and methods used in this paper. Code and leaderboards are available at https://wilds.stanford.edu.

Pang Wei Koh, Shiori Sagawa, Henrik Marklund et al.

Distribution shifts -- where the training distribution differs from the test distribution -- can substantially degrade the accuracy of machine learning (ML) systems deployed in the wild. Despite their ubiquity in the real-world deployments, these distribution shifts are under-represented in the datasets widely used in the ML community today. To address this gap, we present WILDS, a curated benchmark of 10 datasets reflecting a diverse range of distribution shifts that naturally arise in real-world applications, such as shifts across hospitals for tumor identification; across camera traps for wildlife monitoring; and across time and location in satellite imaging and poverty mapping. On each dataset, we show that standard training yields substantially lower out-of-distribution than in-distribution performance. This gap remains even with models trained by existing methods for tackling distribution shifts, underscoring the need for new methods for training models that are more robust to the types of distribution shifts that arise in practice. To facilitate method development, we provide an open-source package that automates dataset loading, contains default model architectures and hyperparameters, and standardizes evaluations. Code and leaderboards are available at https://wilds.stanford.edu.

Henrik Marklund, Alex Infanger, Benjamin Van Roy

Because human preferences are too complex to codify, AIs operate with misspecified objectives. Optimizing such objectives often produces undesirable outcomes; this phenomenon is known as reward hacking. Such outcomes are not necessarily catastrophic. Indeed, most examples of reward hacking in previous literature are benign. And typically, objectives can be modified to resolve the issue. We study the prospect of catastrophic outcomes induced by AIs operating in complex environments. We argue that, when capabilities are sufficiently advanced, pursuing a fixed consequentialist objective tends to result in catastrophic outcomes. We formalize this by establishing conditions that provably lead to such outcomes. Under these conditions, simple or random behavior is safe. Catastrophic risk arises due to extraordinary competence rather than incompetence. With a fixed consequentialist objective, avoiding catastrophe requires constraining AI capabilities. In fact, constraining capabilities the right amount not only averts catastrophe but yields valuable outcomes. Our results apply to any objective produced by modern industrial AI development pipelines.

Yoonho Lee, Jonathan Williams, Henrik Marklund et al. · stanford

Large pretrained models often struggle with underspecified tasks -- situations where the training data does not fully define the desired behavior. For example, chatbots must handle diverse and often conflicting user preferences, requiring adaptability to various user needs. We propose a novel framework to address the general challenge of aligning models to test-time user intent, which is rarely fully specified during training. Our approach involves training an efficient ensemble, i.e., a single neural network with multiple prediction heads, each representing a different function consistent with the training data. Our main contribution is HyRe, a simple adaptation technique that dynamically reweights ensemble members at test time using a small set of labeled examples from the target distribution, which can be labeled in advance or actively queried from a larger unlabeled pool. By leveraging recent advances in scalable ensemble training, our method scales to large pretrained models, with computational costs comparable to fine-tuning a single model. We empirically validate HyRe in several underspecified scenarios, including personalization tasks and settings with distribution shifts. Additionally, with just five preference pairs from each target distribution, the same ensemble adapted via HyRe outperforms the prior state-of-the-art 2B-parameter reward model accuracy across 18 evaluation distributions.

Henrik Marklund, Alex Infanger, Benjamin Van Roy

Reward functions, learned or manually specified, are rarely perfect. Instead of accurately expressing human goals, these reward functions are often distorted by human beliefs about how best to achieve those goals. Specifically, these reward functions often express a combination of the human's terminal goals -- those which are ends in themselves -- and the human's instrumental goals -- those which are means to an end. We formulate a simple example in which even slight conflation of instrumental and terminal goals results in severe misalignment: optimizing the misspecified reward function results in poor performance when measured by the true reward function. This example distills the essential properties of environments that make reinforcement learning highly sensitive to conflation of instrumental and terminal goals. We discuss how this issue can arise with a common approach to reward learning and how it can manifest in real environments.

Anmol Kagrecha, Henrik Marklund, Potsawee Manakul et al.

Human feedback is increasingly used across diverse applications like training AI models, developing recommender systems, and measuring public opinion -- with granular feedback often being preferred over binary feedback for its greater informativeness. While it is easy to accurately estimate a population's distribution of feedback given feedback from a large number of individuals, cost constraints typically necessitate using smaller groups. A simple method to approximate the population distribution is regularized averaging: compute the empirical distribution and regularize it toward a prior. Can we do better? As we will discuss, the answer to this question depends on feedback granularity. Suppose one wants to predict a population's distribution of feedback using feedback from a limited number of individuals. We show that, as feedback granularity increases, one can substantially improve upon predictions of regularized averaging by combining individuals' feedback in ways more sophisticated than regularized averaging. Our empirical analysis using questions on social attitudes confirms this pattern. In particular, with binary feedback, sophistication barely reduces the number of individuals required to attain a fixed level of performance. By contrast, with five-point feedback, sophisticated methods match the performance of regularized averaging with about half as many individuals.

Henrik Marklund, Benjamin Van Roy

As AI agents generate increasingly sophisticated behaviors, manually encoding human preferences to guide these agents becomes more challenging. To address this, it has been suggested that agents instead learn preferences from human choice data. This approach requires a model of choice behavior that the agent can use to interpret the data. For choices between partial trajectories of states and actions, previous models assume choice probabilities are determined by the partial return or the cumulative advantage. We consider an alternative model based instead on the bootstrapped return, which adds to the partial return an estimate of the future return. Benefits of the bootstrapped return model stem from its treatment of human beliefs. Unlike partial return, choices based on bootstrapped return reflect human beliefs about the environment. Further, while recovering the reward function from choices based on cumulative advantage requires that those beliefs are correct, doing so from choices based on bootstrapped return does not. To motivate the bootstrapped return model, we formulate axioms and prove an Alignment Theorem. This result formalizes how, for a general class of preferences, such models are able to disentangle goals from beliefs. This ensures recovery of an aligned reward function when learning from choices based on bootstrapped return. The bootstrapped return model also affords greater robustness to choice behavior. Even when choices are based on partial return, learning via a bootstrapped return model recovers an aligned reward function. The same holds with choices based on the cumulative advantage if the human and the agent both adhere to correct and consistent beliefs about the environment. On the other hand, if choices are based on bootstrapped return, learning via partial return or cumulative advantage models does not generally produce an aligned reward function.

Anmol Kagrecha, Henrik Marklund, Benjamin Van Roy et al.

Common crowdsourcing systems average estimates of a latent quantity of interest provided by many crowdworkers to produce a group estimate. We develop a new approach -- predict-each-worker -- that leverages self-supervised learning and a novel aggregation scheme. This approach adapts weights assigned to crowdworkers based on estimates they provided for previous quantities. When skills vary across crowdworkers or their estimates correlate, the weighted sum offers a more accurate group estimate than the average. Existing algorithms such as expectation maximization can, at least in principle, produce similarly accurate group estimates. However, their computational requirements become onerous when complex models, such as neural networks, are required to express relationships among crowdworkers. Predict-each-worker accommodates such complexity as well as many other practical challenges. We analyze the efficacy of predict-each-worker through theoretical and computational studies. Among other things, we establish asymptotic optimality as the number of engagements per crowdworker grows.

Marvin Zhang, Henrik Marklund, Nikita Dhawan et al.

A fundamental assumption of most machine learning algorithms is that the training and test data are drawn from the same underlying distribution. However, this assumption is violated in almost all practical applications: machine learning systems are regularly tested under distribution shift, due to changing temporal correlations, atypical end users, or other factors. In this work, we consider the problem setting of domain generalization, where the training data are structured into domains and there may be multiple test time shifts, corresponding to new domains or domain distributions. Most prior methods aim to learn a single robust model or invariant feature space that performs well on all domains. In contrast, we aim to learn models that adapt at test time to domain shift using unlabeled test points. Our primary contribution is to introduce the framework of adaptive risk minimization (ARM), in which models are directly optimized for effective adaptation to shift by learning to adapt on the training domains. Compared to prior methods for robustness, invariance, and adaptation, ARM methods provide performance gains of 1-4% test accuracy on a number of image classification problems exhibiting domain shift.

Jeremy Irvin, Pranav Rajpurkar, Michael Ko et al.

Large, labeled datasets have driven deep learning methods to achieve expert-level performance on a variety of medical imaging tasks. We present CheXpert, a large dataset that contains 224,316 chest radiographs of 65,240 patients. We design a labeler to automatically detect the presence of 14 observations in radiology reports, capturing uncertainties inherent in radiograph interpretation. We investigate different approaches to using the uncertainty labels for training convolutional neural networks that output the probability of these observations given the available frontal and lateral radiographs. On a validation set of 200 chest radiographic studies which were manually annotated by 3 board-certified radiologists, we find that different uncertainty approaches are useful for different pathologies. We then evaluate our best model on a test set composed of 500 chest radiographic studies annotated by a consensus of 5 board-certified radiologists, and compare the performance of our model to that of 3 additional radiologists in the detection of 5 selected pathologies. On Cardiomegaly, Edema, and Pleural Effusion, the model ROC and PR curves lie above all 3 radiologist operating points. We release the dataset to the public as a standard benchmark to evaluate performance of chest radiograph interpretation models. The dataset is freely available at https://stanfordmlgroup.github.io/competitions/chexpert .