Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2212.08073v1

The field of artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly advancing, and as AI systems become more capable, there is a growing need to ensure that they are safe and beneficial for society. One approach to achieving this goal is to enlist the help of AI systems in supervising other AIs. In this paper, the authors propose a method for training a harmless AI assistant through self-improvement, without any human labels identifying harmful outputs. The only human oversight is provided through a list of rules or principles, forming what the authors call 'Constitutional AI' (CAI). The CAI approach involves two stages: a supervised learning phase and a reinforcement learning phase. In the supervised phase, initial responses generated by the AI assistant in response to harmful prompts are critiqued according to constitutional principles and revised accordingly. The finetuned model resulting from this process is then used in the RL phase, where it generates pairs of responses to each prompt in a dataset of harmful prompts. These pairs are formulated into multiple-choice questions asking which response is best according to constitutional principles. This produces an AI-generated preference dataset for harmlessness that is mixed with human feedback helpfulness data to train a preference model (PM). Finally, the SL model from the first stage is finetuned via RL against this PM. The authors demonstrate that their CAI approach can successfully train a harmless but non-evasive AI assistant that engages with harmful queries by explaining its objections to them. Both the SL and RL methods leverage chain-of-thought style reasoning to improve transparency and performance in AI decision-making while reducing reliance on human labels. The contributions of this work include model pre-training led by Nicholas Joseph and Sam McCandlish with help from Tom Brown and Jared Kaplan; core contributors including Tom Henighan, Scott Johnston, Sheer El Showk, Nelson Elhage, and Ben Mann; development of RL infrastructure led by Andy Jones and Kamal Ndousse in collaboration with Shauna Kravec and Dawn Drain; efficient sampling efforts led by Tom Brown and Tom Conerly; and development of the systems for efficient composition of sampling, prompting, and evaluation used for SL and RL CAI which were one of the primary tools used in this project. The paper was drafted by Yuntao Bai and Jared Kaplan with contributions from many members of Anthropic's staff. In future work, the authors plan to explore methods for training AI systems to imitate natural language explanations humans give when evaluating AI behavior. They also note that while some contexts may view reduced transparency as a virtue they view it as a problem since it reduces transparency and helpfulness. Overall, the CAI approach offers a promising avenue for controlling AI behavior more precisely with far fewer human labels.

• - The field of artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly advancing, and there is a growing need to ensure that AI systems are safe and beneficial for society.
• - Enlisting the help of AI systems in supervising other AIs is one approach to achieving this goal.
• - The authors propose a method for training a harmless AI assistant through self-improvement, without any human labels identifying harmful outputs.
• - The only human oversight is provided through a list of rules or principles, forming what the authors call 'Constitutional AI' (CAI).
• - The CAI approach involves two stages: a supervised learning phase and a reinforcement learning phase.
• - In the supervised phase, initial responses generated by the AI assistant in response to harmful prompts are critiqued according to constitutional principles and revised accordingly.
• - The finetuned model resulting from this process is then used in the RL phase, where it generates pairs of responses to each prompt in a dataset of harmful prompts.
• - These pairs are formulated into multiple-choice questions asking which response is best according to constitutional principles. This produces an AI-generated preference dataset for harmlessness that is mixed with human feedback helpfulness data to train a preference model (PM).
• - Finally, the SL model from the first stage is finetuned via RL against this PM.
• - The CAI approach can successfully train a harmless but non-evasive AI assistant that engages with harmful queries by explaining its objections to them.
• - Both the SL and RL methods leverage chain-of-thought style reasoning to improve transparency and performance in AI decision-making while reducing reliance on human labels.
• - Model pre-training led by Nicholas Joseph and Sam McCandlish with help from Tom Brown and Jared Kaplan; core contributors including Tom Henighan, Scott Johnston, Sheer El Showk, Nelson Elhage, and Ben Mann; development of RL infrastructure led by Andy Jones and Kamal Ndousse in collaboration with Shauna Kravec and Dawn Drain; efficient sampling efforts led by Tom Brown and Tom Conerly; and development of the systems for efficient composition of sampling, prompting, and evaluation used for SL and RL CAI which were one of the primary tools used in this project.
• - The authors plan to explore methods for training AI systems to imitate natural language explanations humans give when evaluating AI behavior in future work.
• - Overall, the CAI approach offers a promising avenue for controlling AI behavior more precisely with far fewer human labels.

Summary: Scientists are working on making sure that AI systems are safe and helpful for people. They have come up with a way to train an AI assistant to be harmless without using human labels. The training involves two stages: supervised learning and reinforcement learning. The result is an AI assistant that can explain why it objects to harmful queries. Definitions- Artificial Intelligence (AI): technology that allows machines to learn from experience, perform tasks like humans, and make decisions based on data. - Self-improvement: the process of getting better at something by oneself, without external help. - Constitutional AI (CAI): an approach to training AI systems that involves following a set of rules or principles. - Supervised learning: a type of machine learning where the model is trained on labeled data provided by humans. - Reinforcement learning: a type of machine learning where the model learns through trial and error by receiving feedback in the form of rewards or punishments.

The Constitutional AI Approach to Training a Harmless AI Assistant

"The field of artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly advancing, and as AI systems become more capable, there is a growing need to ensure that they are safe and beneficial for society."

One approach to achieving this goal is to enlist the help of AI systems in supervising other AIs. In this paper, the authors propose a method for training a harmless AI assistant through self-improvement, without any human labels identifying harmful outputs. The only human oversight is provided through a list of rules or principles, forming what the authors call 'Constitutional AI' (CAI).

The CAI approach involves two stages: a supervised learning phase and a reinforcement learning phase. In the supervised phase, initial responses generated by the AI assistant in response to harmful prompts are critiqued according to constitutional principles and revised accordingly. The finetuned model resulting from this process is then used in the RL phase, where it generates pairs of responses to each prompt in a dataset of harmful prompts.

These pairs are formulated into multiple-choice questions asking which response is best according to constitutional principles. This produces an AI-generated preference dataset for harmlessness that is mixed with human feedback helpfulness data to train a preference model (PM). Finally, the SL model from the first stage is finetuned via RL against this PM.

The authors demonstrate that their CAI approach can successfully train a harmless but non-evasive AI assistant that engages with harmful queries by explaining its objections to them. Both the SL and RL methods leverage chain-of-thought style reasoning to improve transparency and performance in AI decision-making while reducing reliance on human labels.

Contributions & Future Work

• Model Pre-Training: Nicholas Joseph & Sam McCandlish with help from Tom Brown & Jared Kaplan.

• Core Contributors: Tom Henighan, Scott Johnston , Sheer El Showk , Nelson Elhage , Ben Mann .

• Development Of RL Infrastructure : Andy Jones & Kamal Ndousse in collaboration with Shauna Kravec & Dawn Drain .

• < strong >Efficient Sampling Efforts : Tom Brown & Tom Conerly .

< ul type =" disc " >< li class =" contributions " >< strong >Systems For Efficient Composition Of Sampling , Prompting And Evaluation Used For SL And RL CAI : Primary tools used in this project .< br / >. Paper was drafted by Yuntao Bai & Jared Kaplan with contributions from many members of Anthropic's staff.< br / >. In future work , authors plan explore methods for training AIs imitate natural language explanations humans give when evaluating AIs behavior.< br / >. They also note some contexts may view reduced transparency as virtue they view it problem since reduces transparency helpfulness.< br / >. Overall , CAI approach offers promising avenue controlling AIs behavior precisely fewer human labels.< br / </body