Jesus Rios

Erik Miehling, Michael Desmond, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy et al. · ibm-research

Building pluralistic AI requires designing models that are able to be shaped to represent a wide range of value systems and cultures. Achieving this requires first being able to evaluate the degree to which a given model is capable of reflecting various personas. To this end, we propose a benchmark for evaluating the steerability of model personas as a function of prompting. Our design is based on a formal definition of prompt steerability, which analyzes the degree to which a model's joint behavioral distribution can be shifted from its baseline. By defining steerability indices and inspecting how these indices change as a function of steering effort, we can estimate the steerability of a model across various persona dimensions and directions. Our benchmark reveals that the steerability of many current models is limited -- due to both a skew in their baseline behavior and an asymmetry in their steerability across many persona dimensions. We release an implementation of our benchmark at https://github.com/IBM/prompt-steering.

Swapnaja Achintalwar, Ioana Baldini, Djallel Bouneffouf et al. · ibm-research

The alignment of large language models is usually done by model providers to add or control behaviors that are common or universally understood across use cases and contexts. In contrast, in this article, we present an approach and architecture that empowers application developers to tune a model to their particular values, social norms, laws and other regulations, and orchestrate between potentially conflicting requirements in context. We lay out three main components of such an Alignment Studio architecture: Framers, Instructors, and Auditors that work in concert to control the behavior of a language model. We illustrate this approach with a running example of aligning a company's internal-facing enterprise chatbot to its business conduct guidelines.

Jesus Rios, Pierre Dognin, Ronny Luss et al. · ibm-research

Full fine-tuning of large language models for alignment and task adaptation has become prohibitively expensive as models have grown in size. Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) methods aim at significantly reducing the computational and memory resources needed for fine-tuning these models by only training on a small number of parameters instead of all model parameters. Currently, the most popular PEFT method is the Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), which freezes the parameters of the model and introduces a small set of trainable parameters in the form of low-rank matrices. We propose simply reducing the number of trainable parameters by randomly selecting a small proportion of the model parameters to train on, while fixing all other parameters, without any additional prior assumptions such as low-rank structures. In this paper, we compare the efficiency and performance of our proposed approach to other PEFT methods as well as full parameter fine-tuning. We find our method to be competitive with LoRA when using a similar number of trainable parameters. Our findings suggest that what truly matters for a PEFT technique to perform well is not necessarily the specific adapter structure, but rather the number of trainable parameters being used.

Pierre Dognin, Jesus Rios, Ronny Luss et al.

Developing value-aligned AI agents is a complex undertaking and an ongoing challenge in the field of AI. Specifically within the domain of Large Language Models (LLMs), the capability to consolidate multiple independently trained dialogue agents, each aligned with a distinct moral value, into a unified system that can adapt to and be aligned with multiple moral values is of paramount importance. In this paper, we propose a system that does contextual moral value alignment based on contextual aggregation. Here, aggregation is defined as the process of integrating a subset of LLM responses that are best suited to respond to a user input, taking into account features extracted from the user's input. The proposed system shows better results in term of alignment to human value compared to the state of the art.