Takashi Ishida

Johannes Ackermann, Takashi Ishida, Masashi Sugiyama

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) allows us to train models, such as language models (LMs), to follow complex human preferences. In RLHF for LMs, we first train an LM using supervised fine-tuning, sample pairs of responses, obtain human feedback, and use the resulting data to train a reward model (RM). RL methods are then used to train the LM to maximize the reward given by the RM. As training progresses, the responses generated by the LM no longer resemble the responses seen by the RM during training, leading to the RM becoming inaccurate. The score given by the RM keeps increasing, but the learned behavior no longer matches the human preferences. This issue is known as overoptimization. We investigate overoptimization from the point of view of distribution shift and show that the shift results in an inconsistent estimate of the RM parameters, leading to an inconsistent estimate of the policy gradient. We propose Off-Policy Corrected Reward Modeling (OCRM), which iteratively off-policy corrects the RM using importance weighting, without requiring new labels or samples. This results in a more accurate RM, which empirically leads to an improved final policy. We validate our approach in experiments with summarization and chatbot datasets and show that it performs significantly better than standard RLHF methods and baselines. Our implementation is available at https://github.com/JohannesAck/OffPolicyCorrectedRewardModeling

Ryota Ushio, Takashi Ishida, Masashi Sugiyama

While the performance of machine learning systems has experienced significant improvement in recent years, relatively little attention has been paid to the fundamental question: to what extent can we improve our models? This paper provides a means of answering this question in the setting of binary classification, which is practical and theoretically supported. We extend a previous work that utilizes soft labels for estimating the Bayes error, the optimal error rate, in two important ways. First, we theoretically investigate the properties of the bias of the hard-label-based estimator discussed in the original work. We reveal that the decay rate of the bias is adaptive to how well the two class-conditional distributions are separated, and it can decay significantly faster than the previous result suggested as the number of hard labels per instance grows. Second, we tackle a more challenging problem setting: estimation with corrupted soft labels. One might be tempted to use calibrated soft labels instead of clean ones. However, we reveal that calibration guarantee is not enough, that is, even perfectly calibrated soft labels can result in a substantially inaccurate estimate. Then, we show that isotonic calibration can provide a statistically consistent estimator under an assumption weaker than that of the previous work. Our method is instance-free, i.e., we do not assume access to any input instances. This feature allows it to be adopted in practical scenarios where the instances are not available due to privacy issues. Experiments with synthetic and real-world datasets show the validity of our methods and theory.

Takashi Ishida, Ikko Yamane, Nontawat Charoenphakdee et al.

There is a fundamental limitation in the prediction performance that a machine learning model can achieve due to the inevitable uncertainty of the prediction target. In classification problems, this can be characterized by the Bayes error, which is the best achievable error with any classifier. The Bayes error can be used as a criterion to evaluate classifiers with state-of-the-art performance and can be used to detect test set overfitting. We propose a simple and direct Bayes error estimator, where we just take the mean of the labels that show \emph{uncertainty} of the class assignments. Our flexible approach enables us to perform Bayes error estimation even for weakly supervised data. In contrast to others, our method is model-free and even instance-free. Moreover, it has no hyperparameters and gives a more accurate estimate of the Bayes error than several baselines empirically. Experiments using our method suggest that recently proposed deep networks such as the Vision Transformer may have reached, or is about to reach, the Bayes error for benchmark datasets. Finally, we discuss how we can study the inherent difficulty of the acceptance/rejection decision for scientific articles, by estimating the Bayes error of the ICLR papers from 2017 to 2023.