Richard L. Lewis

CL
h-index6
5papers
785citations
Novelty48%
AI Score33

5 Papers

11.7AIOct 24, 2023
Combining Behaviors with the Successor Features Keyboard

Wilka Carvalho, Andre Saraiva, Angelos Filos et al. · deepmind, stanford

The Option Keyboard (OK) was recently proposed as a method for transferring behavioral knowledge across tasks. OK transfers knowledge by adaptively combining subsets of known behaviors using Successor Features (SFs) and Generalized Policy Improvement (GPI). However, it relies on hand-designed state-features and task encodings which are cumbersome to design for every new environment. In this work, we propose the "Successor Features Keyboard" (SFK), which enables transfer with discovered state-features and task encodings. To enable discovery, we propose the "Categorical Successor Feature Approximator" (CSFA), a novel learning algorithm for estimating SFs while jointly discovering state-features and task encodings. With SFK and CSFA, we achieve the first demonstration of transfer with SFs in a challenging 3D environment where all the necessary representations are discovered. We first compare CSFA against other methods for approximating SFs and show that only CSFA discovers representations compatible with SF&GPI at this scale. We then compare SFK against transfer learning baselines and show that it transfers most quickly to long-horizon tasks.

20.5LGOct 7, 2022
Large Language Models can Implement Policy Iteration

Ethan Brooks, Logan Walls, Richard L. Lewis et al.

This work presents In-Context Policy Iteration, an algorithm for performing Reinforcement Learning (RL), in-context, using foundation models. While the application of foundation models to RL has received considerable attention, most approaches rely on either (1) the curation of expert demonstrations (either through manual design or task-specific pretraining) or (2) adaptation to the task of interest using gradient methods (either fine-tuning or training of adapter layers). Both of these techniques have drawbacks. Collecting demonstrations is labor-intensive, and algorithms that rely on them do not outperform the experts from which the demonstrations were derived. All gradient techniques are inherently slow, sacrificing the "few-shot" quality that made in-context learning attractive to begin with. In this work, we present an algorithm, ICPI, that learns to perform RL tasks without expert demonstrations or gradients. Instead we present a policy-iteration method in which the prompt content is the entire locus of learning. ICPI iteratively updates the contents of the prompt from which it derives its policy through trial-and-error interaction with an RL environment. In order to eliminate the role of in-weights learning (on which approaches like Decision Transformer rely heavily), we demonstrate our algorithm using Codex, a language model with no prior knowledge of the domains on which we evaluate it.

8.8LGJan 28, 2023
Composing Task Knowledge with Modular Successor Feature Approximators

Wilka Carvalho, Angelos Filos, Richard L. Lewis et al.

Recently, the Successor Features and Generalized Policy Improvement (SF&GPI) framework has been proposed as a method for learning, composing, and transferring predictive knowledge and behavior. SF&GPI works by having an agent learn predictive representations (SFs) that can be combined for transfer to new tasks with GPI. However, to be effective this approach requires state features that are useful to predict, and these state-features are typically hand-designed. In this work, we present a novel neural network architecture, "Modular Successor Feature Approximators" (MSFA), where modules both discover what is useful to predict, and learn their own predictive representations. We show that MSFA is able to better generalize compared to baseline architectures for learning SFs and modular architectures

3.4CLDec 24, 2024Code
Do Language Models Understand the Cognitive Tasks Given to Them? Investigations with the N-Back Paradigm

Xiaoyang Hu, Richard L. Lewis

Cognitive tasks originally developed for humans are now increasingly used to study language models. While applying these tasks is often straightforward, interpreting their results can be challenging. In particular, when a model underperforms, it is often unclear whether this results from a limitation in the cognitive ability being tested or a failure to understand the task itself. A recent study argues that GPT 3.5's declining performance on 2-back and 3-back tasks reflects a working memory capacity limit similar to humans (Gong et al., 2024). By analyzing a range of open-source language models of varying performance levels on these tasks, we show that the poor performance is due at least in part to a limitation in task comprehension and task set maintenance. We challenge the best-performing model with progressively harder versions of the task (up to 10-back) and experiment with alternative prompting strategies, before analyzing model attentions. Our larger aim is to contribute to the ongoing conversation around refining methodologies for the cognitive evaluation of language models.

31.9CLApr 26, 2021
Accounting for Agreement Phenomena in Sentence Comprehension with Transformer Language Models: Effects of Similarity-based Interference on Surprisal and Attention

Soo Hyun Ryu, Richard L. Lewis

We advance a novel explanation of similarity-based interference effects in subject-verb and reflexive pronoun agreement processing, grounded in surprisal values computed from a pretrained large-scale Transformer model, GPT-2. Specifically, we show that surprisal of the verb or reflexive pronoun predicts facilitatory interference effects in ungrammatical sentences, where a distractor noun that matches in number with the verb or pronoun leads to faster reading times, despite the distractor not participating in the agreement relation. We review the human empirical evidence for such effects, including recent meta-analyses and large-scale studies. We also show that attention patterns (indexed by entropy and other measures) in the Transformer show patterns of diffuse attention in the presence of similar distractors, consistent with cue-based retrieval models of parsing. But in contrast to these models, the attentional cues and memory representations are learned entirely from the simple self-supervised task of predicting the next word.