Nishant Subramani

Nishant Subramani, Kshitish Ghate, Mona Diab · cmu

Modern language models (LM) are trained on large scrapes of the Web, containing millions of personal information (PI) instances, many of which LMs memorize, increasing privacy risks. In this work, we develop the regexes and rules (R&R) detector suite to detect email addresses, phone numbers, and IP addresses, which outperforms the best regex-based PI detectors. On a manually curated set of 483 instances of PI, we measure memorization: finding that 13.6% are parroted verbatim by the Pythia-6.9b model, i.e., when the model is prompted with the tokens that precede the PI in the original document, greedy decoding generates the entire PI span exactly. We expand this analysis to study models of varying sizes (160M-6.9B) and pretraining time steps (70k-143k iterations) in the Pythia model suite and find that both model size and amount of pretraining are positively correlated with memorization. Even the smallest model, Pythia-160m, parrots 2.7% of the instances exactly. Consequently, we strongly recommend that pretraining datasets be aggressively filtered and anonymized to minimize PI parroting.

Nishant Subramani, Jason Eisner, Justin Svegliato et al. · cmu, microsoft-research

Tool-using agents that act in the world need to be both useful and safe. Well-calibrated model confidences can be used to weigh the risk versus reward of potential actions, but prior work shows that many models are poorly calibrated. Inspired by interpretability literature exploring the internals of models, we propose a novel class of model-internal confidence estimators (MICE) to better assess confidence when calling tools. MICE first decodes from each intermediate layer of the language model using logitLens and then computes similarity scores between each layer's generation and the final output. These features are fed into a learned probabilistic classifier to assess confidence in the decoded output. On the simulated trial and error (STE) tool-calling dataset using Llama3 models, we find that MICE beats or matches the baselines on smoothed expected calibration error. Using MICE confidences to determine whether to call a tool significantly improves over strong baselines on a new metric, expected tool-calling utility. Further experiments show that MICE is sample-efficient, can generalize zero-shot to unseen APIs, and results in higher tool-calling utility in scenarios with varying risk levels. Our code is open source, available at https://github.com/microsoft/mice_for_cats.