Secrets of RLHF in Large Language Models Part I: PPO

AI-generated keywords: RLHF LLMs PPO GPT-4 Human Alignment

AI-generated Key Points

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

Authors: Rui Zheng, Shihan Dou, Songyang Gao, Wei Shen, Binghai Wang, Yan Liu, Senjie Jin, Qin Liu, Limao Xiong, Lu Chen, Zhiheng Xi, Yuhao Zhou, Nuo Xu, Wenbin Lai, Minghao Zhu, Rongxiang Weng, Wensen Cheng, Cheng Chang, Zhangyue Yin, Yuan Hua, Haoran Huang, Tianxiang Sun, Hang Yan, Tao Gui, Qi Zhang, Xipeng Qiu, Xuanjing Huang

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have formulated a blueprint for the advancement of artificial general intelligence. Its primary objective is to function as a human-centric (helpful, honest, and harmless) assistant. Alignment with humans assumes paramount significance, and reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) emerges as the pivotal technological paradigm underpinning this pursuit. Current technical routes usually include \textbf{reward models} to measure human preferences, \textbf{Proximal Policy Optimization} (PPO) to optimize policy model outputs, and \textbf{process supervision} to improve step-by-step reasoning capabilities. However, due to the challenges of reward design, environment interaction, and agent training, coupled with huge trial and error cost of large language models, there is a significant barrier for AI researchers to motivate the development of technical alignment and safe landing of LLMs. The stable training of RLHF has still been a puzzle. In the first report, we dissect the framework of RLHF, re-evaluate the inner workings of PPO, and explore how the parts comprising PPO algorithms impact policy agent training. We identify policy constraints being the key factor for the effective implementation of the PPO algorithm. Therefore, we explore the PPO-max, an advanced version of PPO algorithm, to efficiently improve the training stability of the policy model. Based on our main results, we perform a comprehensive analysis of RLHF abilities compared with SFT models and ChatGPT. The absence of open-source implementations has posed significant challenges to the investigation of LLMs alignment. Therefore, we are eager to release technical reports, reward models and PPO codes

Submitted to arXiv on 11 Jul. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2307.04964v1

Large language models (LLMs) have become a crucial component in the development of artificial general intelligence, with the goal of creating human-centric assistants. Reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) is a key technological paradigm for achieving alignment with humans. However, there are several limitations and challenges that need to be addressed. One limitation is the scaling law, as the impact of model size and data scale on RLHF performance has not been thoroughly investigated. The current study focuses on a 7-billion-parameter model, but further research is needed to understand how different sizes and scales affect RLHF. Another limitation is the reward model used in RLHF experiments. The study relies on openly available English human preference datasets and a small amount of self-constructed Chinese data. While these datasets provide some evaluation of the reward model, they may not be sufficient for a comprehensive assessment. The evaluation metric used in this study primarily relies on manual evaluations and automated evaluations using GPT-4. While these methods provide some insights into RLHF abilities, there are numerous benchmarks and NLP tasks that could be utilized for a more detailed assessment. During the Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) phase, the focus is more on achieving stability rather than enhancing final performance. While stability is important, it does not guarantee improved outcomes; additionally, the reward score alone may not reliably predict RLHF performance during training, indicating a need for a more suitable performance indicator. Despite these limitations, there have been significant contributions made in this study. Competitive Chinese and English reward models have been released with good cross-model generalization ability, reducing the cost of relabeling human preference data. In-depth analysis of the PPO algorithm has led to the proposal of an advanced version called PPO-max which ensures stable model training; moreover complete PPO-max codes have also been released to facilitate better alignment between LLMs and humans. Overall while there are still challenges and limitations in exploring RLHF this study provides valuable insights and contributions towards the development of human-aligned LLMs.
Created on 12 Jul. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

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.