Given a graph pair $(G^1, G^2)$, graph edit distance (GED) is defined as the minimum number of edit operations converting $G^1$ to $G^2$. GED is a fundamental operation widely used in many applications, but its exact computation is NP-hard, so the approximation of GED has gained a lot of attention. Data-driven learning-based methods have been found to provide superior results compared to classical approximate algorithms, but they directly fit the coupling relationship between a pair of vertices from their vertex features. We argue that while pairwise vertex features can capture the coupling cost (discrepancy) of a pair of vertices, the vertex coupling matrix should be derived from the vertex-pair cost matrix through a more well-established method that is aware of the global context of the graph pair, such as optimal transport. In this paper, we propose an ensemble approach that integrates a supervised learning-based method and an unsupervised method, both based on optimal transport. Our learning method, GEDIOT, is based on inverse optimal transport that leverages a learnable Sinkhorn algorithm to generate the coupling matrix. Our unsupervised method, GEDGW, models GED computation as a linear combination of optimal transport and its variant, Gromov-Wasserstein discrepancy, for node and edge operations, respectively, which can be solved efficiently without needing the ground truth. Our ensemble method, GEDHOT, combines GEDIOT and GEDGW to further boost the performance. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our methods significantly outperform the existing methods in terms of the performance of GED computation, edit path generation, and model generalizability.

Despite the success of diffusion models, the training and inference of diffusion models are notoriously expensive due to the long chain of the reverse process. In parallel, the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis (LTH) claims that there exists winning tickets (i.e., a properly pruned sub-network together with original weight initialization) that can achieve performance competitive to the original dense neural network when trained in isolation. In this work, we for the first time apply LTH to diffusion models. We empirically find subnetworks at sparsity 90% 99% without compromising performance for denoising diffusion probabilistic models on benchmarks (CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, MNIST). Moreover, existing LTH works identify the subnetworks with a unified sparsity along different layers. We observe that the similarity between two winning tickets of a model varies from block to block. Specifically, the upstream layers from two winning tickets for a model tend to be more similar than the downstream layers. Therefore, we propose to find the winning ticket with varying sparsity along different layers in the model. Experimental results demonstrate that our method can find sparser sub-models that require less memory for storage and reduce the necessary number of FLOPs.

Human feedback is commonly utilized to finetune AI assistants. But human feedback may also encourage model responses that match user beliefs over truthful ones, a behaviour known as sycophancy. We investigate the prevalence of sycophancy in models whose finetuning procedure made use of human feedback, and the potential role of human preference judgments in such behavior. We first demonstrate that five state-of-the-art AI assistants consistently exhibit sycophancy across four varied free-form text-generation tasks. To understand if human preferences drive this broadly observed behavior, we analyze existing human preference data. We find that when a response matches a user's views, it is more likely to be preferred. Moreover, both humans and preference models (PMs) prefer convincingly-written sycophantic responses over correct ones a non-negligible fraction of the time. Optimizing model outputs against PMs also sometimes sacrifices truthfulness in favor of sycophancy. Overall, our results indicate that sycophancy is a general behavior of state-of-the-art AI assistants, likely driven in part by human preference judgments favoring sycophantic responses.

Lottery Ticket Hypothesis (LTH) claims the existence of a winning ticket (i.e., a properly pruned sub-network together with original weight initialization) that can achieve competitive performance to the original dense network. A recent work, called UGS, extended LTH to prune graph neural networks (GNNs) for effectively accelerating GNN inference. UGS simultaneously prunes the graph adjacency matrix and the model weights using the same masking mechanism, but since the roles of the graph adjacency matrix and the weight matrices are very different, we find that their sparsifications lead to different performance characteristics. Specifically, we find that the performance of a sparsified GNN degrades significantly when the graph sparsity goes beyond a certain extent. Therefore, we propose two techniques to improve GNN performance when the graph sparsity is high. First, UGS prunes the adjacency matrix using a loss formulation which, however, does not properly involve all elements of the adjacency matrix; in contrast, we add a new auxiliary loss head to better guide the edge pruning by involving the entire adjacency matrix. Second, by regarding unfavorable graph sparsification as adversarial data perturbations, we formulate the pruning process as a min-max optimization problem to gain the robustness of lottery tickets when the graph sparsity is high. We further investigate the question: Can the "retrainable" winning ticket of a GNN be also effective for graph transferring learning? We call it the transferable graph lottery ticket (GLT) hypothesis. Extensive experiments were conducted which demonstrate the superiority of our proposed sparsification method over UGS, and which empirically verified our transferable GLT hypothesis.

As language models (LMs) scale, they develop many novel behaviors, good and bad, exacerbating the need to evaluate how they behave. Prior work creates evaluations with crowdwork (which is time-consuming and expensive) or existing data sources (which are not always available). Here, we automatically generate evaluations with LMs. We explore approaches with varying amounts of human effort, from instructing LMs to write yes/no questions to making complex Winogender schemas with multiple stages of LM-based generation and filtering. Crowdworkers rate the examples as highly relevant and agree with 90-100% of labels, sometimes more so than corresponding human-written datasets. We generate 154 datasets and discover new cases of inverse scaling where LMs get worse with size. Larger LMs repeat back a dialog user's preferred answer ("sycophancy") and express greater desire to pursue concerning goals like resource acquisition and goal preservation. We also find some of the first examples of inverse scaling in RL from Human Feedback (RLHF), where more RLHF makes LMs worse. For example, RLHF makes LMs express stronger political views (on gun rights and immigration) and a greater desire to avoid shut down. Overall, LM-written evaluations are high-quality and let us quickly discover many novel LM behaviors.