inappropriate response
Chain-of-Thought Driven Adversarial Scenario Extrapolation for Robust Language Models
Rashid, Md Rafi Ur, Dasu, Vishnu Asutosh, Wang, Ye, Tan, Gang, Mehnaz, Shagufta
Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive capabilities, but remain susceptible to a growing spectrum of safety risks, including jailbreaks, toxic content, hallucinations, and bias. Existing defenses often address only a single threat type or resort to rigid outright rejection, sacrificing user experience and failing to generalize across diverse and novel attacks. This paper introduces Adversarial Scenario Extrapolation (ASE), a novel inference-time computation framework that leverages Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning to simultaneously enhance LLM robustness and seamlessness. ASE guides the LLM through a self-generative process of contemplating potential adversarial scenarios and formulating defensive strategies before generating a response to the user query. Comprehensive evaluation on four adversarial benchmarks with four latest LLMs shows that ASE achieves near-zero jailbreak attack success rates and minimal toxicity, while slashing outright rejections to <4%. ASE outperforms six state-of-the-art defenses in robustness-seamlessness trade-offs, with 92-99% accuracy on adversarial Q&A and 4-10x lower bias scores. By transforming adversarial perception into an intrinsic cognitive process, ASE sets a new paradigm for secure and natural human-AI interaction.
Ensuring Safe and High-Quality Outputs: A Guideline Library Approach for Language Models
Luo, Yi, Lin, Zhenghao, Zhang, Yuhao, Sun, Jiashuo, Lin, Chen, Xu, Chengjin, Su, Xiangdong, Shen, Yelong, Guo, Jian, Gong, Yeyun
Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive capabilities but also present risks such as biased content generation and privacy issues. One of the current alignment techniques includes principle-driven integration, but it faces challenges arising from the imprecision of manually crafted rules and inadequate risk perception in models without safety training. To address these, we introduce Guide-Align, a two-stage approach. Initially, a safety-trained model identifies potential risks and formulates specific guidelines for various inputs, establishing a comprehensive library of guidelines and a model for input-guidelines retrieval. Subsequently, the retrieval model correlates new inputs with relevant guidelines, which guide LLMs in response generation to ensure safe and high-quality outputs, thereby aligning with human values. An additional optional stage involves fine-tuning a model with well-aligned datasets generated through the process implemented in the second stage. Our method customizes guidelines to accommodate diverse inputs, thereby enhancing the fine-grainedness and comprehensiveness of the guideline library. Furthermore, it incorporates safety expertise from a safety-trained LLM through a lightweight retrieval model. We evaluate our approach on three benchmarks, demonstrating significant improvements in LLM security and quality. Notably, our fine-tuned model, Labrador, even at 13 billion parameters, outperforms GPT-3.5-turbo and surpasses GPT-4 in alignment capabilities.
ChatGPT and the ethics of AI
Like everyone and their brother, I've been playing with ChatGPT and asking it life's essential questions. It confidently tells me things, and some of those things are incredibly insightful. However, people and chatbots that are wrong often state things confidently. I saw a recent Google Answer posted on Mastodon. In this "answer," Google suggested that there were benefits to disposing of used car batteries in the ocean, including charging electric eels and powering the Gulf Stream.