Recent studies have shown that neural networks trained on algorithmic tasks have the ability to rediscover known algorithms for solving those tasks. However, it is important to note that the emergence of familiar algorithms is not guaranteed. For example, in the case of modular arithmetic, while the Clock algorithm has been identified in previous research, other algorithms such as the Pizza algorithm and more complex procedures were also found to be prevalent in trained models. To distinguish between these different algorithmic phases and gain a deeper understanding of their behavior, various interpretability techniques were employed. These included logit visualization, isolation of principle components in embedding space, and gradient-based measures of model symmetry. Not only did these techniques allow for automatic classification of trained networks based on the algorithms they implement, but they also unveiled algorithmic phase transitions in the space of model hyperparameters. Through this study, it was observed that the emergence of a Pizza or Clock algorithm depended on the relative strength of linear layers and attention outputs within the network. Additionally, it was discovered that networks sometimes ensemble multiple copies of an algorithm in parallel. These findings pose new challenges for mechanistic interpretability in neural networks - how to systematically find, classify and interpret unfamiliar algorithms; and how to disentangle multiple parallel algorithm implementations when ensembling is present. While this study focused on a single learning problem (modular addition), it highlighted qualitatively different model behaviors across architectures and seeds within this restricted domain. As such, future work will be needed to scale these techniques to more complex models used in real-world tasks. In terms of broader impact , interpretability techniques are seen as crucial for creating safe AI systems but also carry risks associated with dual-use technologies. Therefore is essential when deploying such techniques. This study was made possible through valuable discussions with Mingyang Deng and anonymous reviewers, as well as support from MIT SuperCloud for computation resources. The authors acknowledge funding from various sources including the Foundational Questions Institute, Rothberg Family Fund for Cognitive Science, IAIFI through NSF grant PHY-2019786, and a gift from the OpenPhilanthropy Foundation.
- - Neural networks trained on algorithmic tasks can rediscover known algorithms for solving those tasks
- - Emergence of familiar algorithms is not guaranteed; other algorithms like the Pizza algorithm and more complex procedures were also found to be prevalent
- - Interpretability techniques such as logit visualization, isolation of principle components, and gradient-based measures were employed to understand algorithmic phases in trained models
- - Techniques allowed for automatic classification of networks based on implemented algorithms and unveiled algorithmic phase transitions in model hyperparameters space
- - Emergence of Pizza or Clock algorithm depended on relative strength of linear layers and attention outputs within the network
- - Networks sometimes ensemble multiple copies of an algorithm in parallel, posing challenges for mechanistic interpretability
- - Future work needed to scale techniques to more complex models used in real-world tasks
- - Interpretability techniques are crucial for creating safe AI systems but carry risks associated with dual-use technologies; caution is essential when deploying such techniques
Summary- Computers can learn to solve problems by using something called neural networks.
- Sometimes these computers can find new ways to solve problems that we didn't know about before, like the Pizza algorithm.
- People use special techniques to understand how these computers work and what they are doing.
- These techniques help us figure out which algorithms the computers are using and how they change over time.
- It's important to be careful when using these techniques because they can be used for good things but also for bad things.
Definitions1. Neural networks: Computer systems that are designed to mimic the way a human brain works, used for tasks like problem-solving and pattern recognition.
2. Algorithms: Step-by-step instructions or rules followed by a computer to solve a problem or perform a task.
3. Interpretability: The ability to understand and explain how something works or why it behaves in a certain way.
4. Hyperparameters: Settings or configurations that control the learning process of a machine learning model.
5. Ensemble: A group of models working together to make predictions or decisions, often more accurate than individual models alone.
6. Dual-use technologies: Technologies that have both beneficial and potentially harmful applications, requiring caution in their development and deployment.
Recent studies have shown that neural networks, when trained on algorithmic tasks, have the ability to rediscover known algorithms for solving those tasks. This has led to a deeper understanding of how these networks learn and process information. However, it is important to note that the emergence of familiar algorithms is not guaranteed. In fact, recent research has found that in some cases, other algorithms may be prevalent in trained models.
One such example is in the case of modular arithmetic. While previous studies have identified the Clock algorithm as being commonly implemented by trained neural networks, other algorithms such as the Pizza algorithm and more complex procedures were also found to be prevalent. This raises questions about how these different algorithmic phases can be distinguished and understood.
To address this issue, researchers employed various interpretability techniques in their study. These techniques included logit visualization, isolation of principle components in embedding space, and gradient-based measures of model symmetry. By using these methods, they were able to automatically classify trained networks based on the algorithms they implement and gain a deeper understanding of their behavior.
One key finding from this study was that the emergence of a Pizza or Clock algorithm depended on the relative strength of linear layers and attention outputs within the network. This suggests that different architectures may lead to qualitatively different model behaviors when it comes to implementing specific algorithms.
Additionally, researchers discovered that networks sometimes ensemble multiple copies of an algorithm in parallel. This poses new challenges for mechanistic interpretability in neural networks - how do we systematically find, classify and interpret unfamiliar algorithms? And how do we disentangle multiple parallel implementations when ensembling is present?
While this study focused on a single learning problem (modular addition), it highlighted qualitatively different model behaviors across architectures and seeds within this restricted domain. As such, future work will be needed to scale these techniques to more complex models used in real-world tasks.
It's worth noting that interpretability techniques are seen as crucial for creating safe AI systems, but they also carry risks associated with dual-use technologies. Therefore, ethical considerations must be taken into account when deploying such techniques.
This study was made possible through valuable discussions with Mingyang Deng and anonymous reviewers, as well as support from MIT SuperCloud for computation resources. The authors acknowledge funding from various sources including the Foundational Questions Institute, Rothberg Family Fund for Cognitive Science, IAIFI through NSF grant PHY-2019786, and a gift from the OpenPhilanthropy Foundation.
In conclusion, recent research has shown that neural networks have the ability to rediscover known algorithms when trained on algorithmic tasks. However, this is not always guaranteed and other algorithms may emerge instead. To better understand these different algorithmic phases and their behavior in trained models, interpretability techniques were employed. These techniques allowed for automatic classification of trained networks based on the algorithms they implement and revealed algorithmic phase transitions in the space of model hyperparameters. This study highlights the need for further research in scaling these techniques to more complex models used in real-world tasks and considering ethical implications when deploying them.