Learning to summarize from human feedback

AI-generated keywords: Learning to Summarize Human Feedback Language Models Reinforcement Learning Summary Quality

AI-generated Key Points

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Authors address challenges faced by language models in training and evaluation due to limitations of existing data and metrics
Proposed novel approach involves training a model to optimize for human preferences by collecting a large dataset of human comparisons between summaries
Model is then used as a reward function to fine-tune summarization policy through reinforcement learning
Study focuses on TL;DR dataset of Reddit posts and shows significant improvements in summary quality compared to human reference summaries and larger models fine-tuned with supervised learning alone
Improvements transfer effectively to CNN/DM news articles without news-specific fine-tuning
Extensive analyses conducted on human feedback dataset and fine-tuned models to understand performance better
Reward model generalizes well to new datasets and leads to superior summaries compared to optimizing ROUGE based on human evaluations
Emphasizes importance of optimizing for desired outcomes rather than relying solely on traditional metrics

Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Nisan Stiennon, Long Ouyang, Jeff Wu, Daniel M. Ziegler, Ryan Lowe, Chelsea Voss, Alec Radford, Dario Amodei, Paul Christiano

arXiv: 2009.01325v1 - DOI (cs.CL)

License: NONEXCLUSIVE-DISTRIB 1.0

Abstract: As language models become more powerful, training and evaluation are increasingly bottlenecked by the data and metrics used for a particular task. For example, summarization models are often trained to predict human reference summaries and evaluated using ROUGE, but both of these metrics are rough proxies for what we really care about---summary quality. In this work, we show that it is possible to significantly improve summary quality by training a model to optimize for human preferences. We collect a large, high-quality dataset of human comparisons between summaries, train a model to predict the human-preferred summary, and use that model as a reward function to fine-tune a summarization policy using reinforcement learning. We apply our method to a version of the TL;DR dataset of Reddit posts and find that our models significantly outperform both human reference summaries and much larger models fine-tuned with supervised learning alone. Our models also transfer to CNN/DM news articles, producing summaries nearly as good as the human reference without any news-specific fine-tuning. We conduct extensive analyses to understand our human feedback dataset and fine-tuned models. We establish that our reward model generalizes to new datasets, and that optimizing our reward model results in better summaries than optimizing ROUGE according to humans. We hope the evidence from our paper motivates machine learning researchers to pay closer attention to how their training loss affects the model behavior they actually want.

Submitted to arXiv on 02 Sep. 2020

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2009.01325v1

⚠This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

Comprehensive Summary
Key points
Layman's Summary
Blog article

In their paper titled "Learning to Summarize from Human Feedback," authors Nisan Stiennon, Long Ouyang, Jeff Wu, Daniel M. Ziegler, Ryan Lowe, Chelsea Voss, Alec Radford, Dario Amodei and Paul Christiano address the challenges faced by language models in training and evaluation due to limitations of existing data and metrics. Summarization models are typically trained on predicting human reference summaries and evaluated using metrics like ROUGE; however, these measures often fall short in capturing true summary quality. To overcome this limitation, the authors propose a novel approach where a model is trained to optimize for human preferences. This involves collecting a large dataset of human comparisons between summaries to train a model that can predict preferred summaries. The resulting model is then used as a reward function to fine-tune a summarization policy through reinforcement learning. The study focuses on the TL;DR dataset of Reddit posts and demonstrates significant improvements in summary quality compared to both human reference summaries and larger models fine-tuned with supervised learning alone. Remarkably, these improvements also transfer effectively to CNN/DM news articles without any news-specific fine-tuning. Extensive analyses are conducted on the human feedback dataset and the fine-tuned models to better understand their performance. The authors establish that their reward model generalizes well to new datasets and leads to superior summaries compared to optimizing ROUGE based on human evaluations. Overall, the findings presented in this paper urge machine learning researchers to consider how their training loss impacts the actual behavior of their models. This emphasizes the importance of optimizing for desired outcomes rather than relying solely on traditional metrics.

- Authors address challenges faced by language models in training and evaluation due to limitations of existing data and metrics
- Proposed novel approach involves training a model to optimize for human preferences by collecting a large dataset of human comparisons between summaries
- Model is then used as a reward function to fine-tune summarization policy through reinforcement learning
- Study focuses on TL;DR dataset of Reddit posts and shows significant improvements in summary quality compared to human reference summaries and larger models fine-tuned with supervised learning alone
- Improvements transfer effectively to CNN/DM news articles without news-specific fine-tuning
- Extensive analyses conducted on human feedback dataset and fine-tuned models to understand performance better
- Reward model generalizes well to new datasets and leads to superior summaries compared to optimizing ROUGE based on human evaluations
- Emphasizes importance of optimizing for desired outcomes rather than relying solely on traditional metrics

SummaryAuthors are trying to make computer programs better at summarizing information, but they face challenges because the current data and ways of measuring success are limited. They came up with a new idea to train a program by using people's preferences to create summaries. This program is then fine-tuned using a method called reinforcement learning. The study used a dataset from Reddit and found that this new approach made the summaries much better compared to other methods. They also found that this improvement worked well for news articles too. Definitions- Authors: People who write books or research papers. - Language models: Computer programs that can understand and generate human language. - Summarization: Making a shorter version of something while keeping the important information. - Dataset: A collection of data or information. - Reinforcement learning: A type of machine learning where the program learns through trial and error based on rewards or punishments.

Introduction

In recent years, there has been a surge in the development of natural language processing (NLP) models that can generate human-like text. One of the key tasks in NLP is summarization, where a model is trained to condense large amounts of information into a shorter summary while retaining its key points and overall meaning. However, evaluating the quality of these summaries has proven to be challenging due to limitations in existing data and metrics. In their paper titled "Learning to Summarize from Human Feedback," authors Nisan Stiennon, Long Ouyang, Jeff Wu, Daniel M. Ziegler, Ryan Lowe, Chelsea Voss, Alec Radford, Dario Amodei and Paul Christiano address this issue by proposing a novel approach for training and evaluating summarization models using human feedback.

The Limitations of Existing Data and Metrics

Traditionally, summarization models are trained on predicting human reference summaries and evaluated using metrics such as ROUGE (Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation). While these measures have been widely used in NLP research, they often fall short in capturing true summary quality. One major limitation is that reference summaries are not always available or consistent across datasets. This leads to variations in evaluation results even when comparing models trained on the same dataset. Additionally, ROUGE only evaluates surface-level features such as word overlap between generated summaries and reference summaries without considering coherence or fluency.

A Novel Approach: Training with Human Preferences

To overcome these limitations, the authors propose a new approach where a model is trained to optimize for human preferences rather than predicting reference summaries directly. This involves collecting a large dataset of human comparisons between two different generated summaries from the same source text. The resulting dataset contains pairs of preferred vs non-preferred summaries according to humans' subjective judgments. The authors then use this dataset to train a model that can predict preferred summaries. This model is referred to as the "reward model" and is used as a reward function in reinforcement learning to fine-tune a summarization policy. This approach allows the model to learn from human feedback and improve its summary generation accordingly.

Results and Analysis

The study focuses on the TL;DR dataset of Reddit posts, which contains short summaries written by users for long posts. The authors demonstrate significant improvements in summary quality compared to both human reference summaries and larger models fine-tuned with supervised learning alone. Remarkably, these improvements also transfer effectively to CNN/DM news articles without any news-specific fine-tuning. This highlights the generalizability of their approach across different datasets. To better understand the performance of their models, the authors conduct extensive analyses on both the human feedback dataset and the fine-tuned models. They find that their reward model generalizes well to new datasets and leads to superior summaries compared to optimizing ROUGE based on human evaluations.

The Importance of Optimizing for Desired Outcomes

Overall, this paper emphasizes the importance of considering how training loss impacts the actual behavior of NLP models. By optimizing for human preferences rather than traditional metrics like ROUGE, researchers can ensure that their models generate high-quality summaries that are preferred by humans. This also highlights the need for more diverse evaluation methods in NLP research beyond traditional metrics. As language understanding continues to advance, it becomes increasingly important for researchers to focus on optimizing for desired outcomes rather than solely relying on existing metrics.

Conclusion

In conclusion, "Learning to Summarize from Human Feedback" presents an innovative approach towards training and evaluating summarization models using human preferences instead of traditional metrics like ROUGE. The results demonstrate significant improvements in summary quality and highlight the importance of considering desired outcomes when training NLP models. This paper serves as a reminder for machine learning researchers to critically evaluate their training methods and metrics, and to prioritize optimizing for desired outcomes rather than solely relying on traditional measures. As NLP continues to advance, it is crucial to consider the impact of our models' behavior on real-world applications and strive towards creating more human-like language generation systems.

Created on 02 Apr. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.