When prompted to think step-by-step, language models (LMs) produce a chain of thought (CoT), a sequence of reasoning steps that the model supposedly used to produce its prediction. However, despite much work on CoT prompting, it is unclear if CoT reasoning is faithful to the models' parameteric beliefs. We introduce a framework for measuring parametric faithfulness of generated reasoning, and propose Faithfulness by Unlearning Reasoning steps (FUR), an instance of this framework. FUR erases information contained in reasoning steps from model parameters. We perform experiments unlearning CoTs of four LMs prompted on four multi-choice question answering (MCQA) datasets. Our experiments show that FUR is frequently able to change the underlying models' prediction by unlearning key steps, indicating when a CoT is parametrically faithful. Further analysis shows that CoTs generated by models post-unlearning support different answers, hinting at a deeper effect of unlearning. Importantly, CoT steps identified as important by FUR do not align well with human notions of plausbility, emphasizing the need for specialized alignment

Large language models (LLMs) risk inadvertently memorizing and divulging sensitive or personally identifiable information (PII) seen in training data, causing privacy concerns. Current approaches to address this issue involve costly dataset scrubbing, or model filtering through unlearning and model editing, which can be bypassed through extraction attacks. We propose REVS, a novel model editing method for unlearning sensitive information from LLMs. REVS identifies and modifies a small subset of neurons relevant for each piece of sensitive information. By projecting these neurons to the vocabulary space (unembedding), we pinpoint the components driving its generation. We then compute a model edit based on the pseudo-inverse of the unembedding matrix, and apply it to de-promote generation of the targeted sensitive data. To adequately evaluate our method on truly sensitive information, we curate two datasets: an email dataset inherently memorized by GPT-J, and a synthetic social security number dataset that we tune the model to memorize. Compared to other state-of-the-art model editing methods, REVS demonstrates superior performance in both eliminating sensitive information and robustness to extraction attacks, while retaining integrity of the underlying model.

Reasoning is a fundamental component for achieving language understanding. Among the multiple types of reasoning, conditional reasoning, the ability to draw different conclusions depending on some condition, has been understudied in large language models (LLMs). Recent prompting methods, such as chain of thought, have significantly improved LLMs on reasoning tasks. Nevertheless, there is still little understanding of what triggers reasoning abilities in LLMs. We hypothesize that code prompts can trigger conditional reasoning in LLMs trained on text and code. We propose a chain of prompts that transforms a natural language problem into code and prompts the LLM with the generated code. Our experiments find that code prompts exhibit a performance boost between 2.6 and 7.7 points on GPT 3.5 across multiple datasets requiring conditional reasoning. We then conduct experiments to discover how code prompts elicit conditional reasoning abilities and through which features. We observe that prompts need to contain natural language text accompanied by high-quality code that closely represents the semantics of the instance text. Furthermore, we show that code prompts are more efficient, requiring fewer demonstrations, and that they trigger superior state tracking of variables or key entities.

Effective OOD detection is crucial for reliable machine learning models, yet most current methods are limited in practical use due to requirements like access to training data or intervention in training. We present a novel method for detecting OOD data in deep neural networks based on transformation smoothness between intermediate layers of a network (BLOOD), which is applicable to pre-trained models without access to training data. BLOOD utilizes the tendency of between-layer representation transformations of in-distribution (ID) data to be smoother than the corresponding transformations of OOD data, a property that we also demonstrate empirically for Transformer networks. We evaluate BLOOD on several text classification tasks with Transformer networks and demonstrate that it outperforms methods with comparable resource requirements. Our analysis also suggests that when learning simpler tasks, OOD data transformations maintain their original sharpness, whereas sharpness increases with more complex tasks.

In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities at scale, particularly at generating text conditioned on a prompt. In our work, we investigate the use of LLMs to augment training data of small language models~(SLMs) with automatically generated counterfactual~(CF) instances -- i.e. minimally altered inputs -- in order to improve out-of-domain~(OOD) performance of SLMs in the extractive question answering~(QA) setup. We show that, across various LLM generators, such data augmentation consistently enhances OOD performance and improves model calibration for both confidence-based and rationale-augmented calibrator models. Furthermore, these performance improvements correlate with higher diversity of CF instances in terms of their surface form and semantic content. Finally, we show that CF augmented models which are easier to calibrate also exhibit much lower entropy when assigning importance, indicating that rationale-augmented calibrators prefer concise explanations.

A popular approach to unveiling the black box of neural NLP models is to leverage saliency methods, which assign scalar importance scores to each input component. A common practice for evaluating whether an interpretability method is faithful has been to use evaluation-by-agreement -- if multiple methods agree on an explanation, its credibility increases. However, recent work has found that saliency methods exhibit weak rank correlations even when applied to the same model instance and advocated for the use of alternative diagnostic methods. In our work, we demonstrate that rank correlation is not a good fit for evaluating agreement and argue that Pearson-$r$ is a better-suited alternative. We further show that regularization techniques that increase faithfulness of attention explanations also increase agreement between saliency methods. By connecting our findings to instance categories based on training dynamics, we show that the agreement of saliency method explanations is very low for easy-to-learn instances. Finally, we connect the improvement in agreement across instance categories to local representation space statistics of instances, paving the way for work on analyzing which intrinsic model properties improve their predisposition to interpretability methods.