As everyday use cases of large language model (LLM) AI assistants have expanded, it is becoming increasingly important to personalize responses to align to different users' preferences and goals. While reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is effective at improving LLMs to be generally more helpful and fluent, it does not account for variability across users, as it models the entire user population with a single reward model, meaning it assumes that everyone's preferences are the same. We present a novel framework, Preference Learning Using Summarization (PLUS), that uses reinforcement learning (RL) to learn to produce text-based summaries of each user's preferences, characteristics, and past conversations. These summaries condition the reward model, enabling it to make personalized predictions about the types of responses valued by each user. Both the user-summarization model and reward model are trained simultaneously, creating an online co-adaptation loop. We show that in contrast to the standard Bradley-Terry model, summaries produced by PLUS capture diverse aspects of user preferences, achieving a 11-77% improvement in reward model accuracy. Key strengths of PLUS are: (1) robust performance with new users and conversation topics, achieving a 25% improvement over the best personalized RLHF technique; (2) zero-shot personalization with state-of-the-art proprietary models like GPT -4 (e.g., PLUS-summary-conditioned responses achieved a 72% win rate compared to 28% for default GPT -4o); (3) learning from flexible user contexts beyond preference labels, and (4) interpretable representation of users, enabling greater transparency and user control in pluralistic LLM alignment.

Large language models (LLMs) are known to have the potential to generate harmful content, posing risks to users. While significant progress has been made in developing taxonomies for LLM risks and safety evaluation prompts, most studies have focused on monolingual contexts, primarily in English. However, language- and region-specific risks in bilingual contexts are often overlooked, and core findings can diverge from those in monolingual settings. In this paper, we introduce Qorgau, a novel dataset specifically designed for safety evaluation in Kazakh and Russian, reflecting the unique bilingual context in Kazakhstan, where both Kazakh (a low-resource language) and Russian (a high-resource language) are spoken. Experiments with both multilingual and language-specific LLMs reveal notable differences in safety performance, emphasizing the need for tailored, region-specific datasets to ensure the responsible and safe deployment of LLMs in countries like Kazakhstan. Warning: this paper contains example data that may be offensive, harmful, or biased.

The growing demand for AI training data has transformed data annotation into a global industry, but traditional approaches relying on human annotators are often time-consuming, labor-intensive, and prone to inconsistent quality. We propose the Model-in-the-Loop (MILO) framework, which integrates AI/ML models into the annotation process. Our research introduces a collaborative paradigm that leverages the strengths of both professional human annotators and large language models (LLMs). By employing LLMs as pre-annotation and real-time assistants, and judges on annotator responses, MILO enables effective interaction patterns between human annotators and LLMs. Three empirical studies on multimodal data annotation demonstrate MILO's efficacy in reducing handling time, improving data quality, and enhancing annotator experiences. We also introduce quality rubrics for flexible evaluation and fine-grained feedback on open-ended annotations. The MILO framework has implications for accelerating AI/ML development, reducing reliance on human annotation alone, and promoting better alignment between human and machine values.

Large Language Model (LLM) assistants, such as ChatGPT, have emerged as potential alternatives to search methods for helping users navigate complex, feature-rich software. LLMs use vast training data from domain-specific texts, software manuals, and code repositories to mimic human-like interactions, offering tailored assistance, including step-by-step instructions. In this work, we investigated LLM-generated software guidance through a within-subject experiment with 16 participants and follow-up interviews. We compared a baseline LLM assistant with an LLM optimized for particular software contexts, SoftAIBot, which also offered guidelines for constructing appropriate prompts. We assessed task completion, perceived accuracy, relevance, and trust. Surprisingly, although SoftAIBot outperformed the baseline LLM, our results revealed no significant difference in LLM usage and user perceptions with or without prompt guidelines and the integration of domain context. Most users struggled to understand how the prompt's text related to the LLM's responses and often followed the LLM's suggestions verbatim, even if they were incorrect. This resulted in difficulties when using the LLM's advice for software tasks, leading to low task completion rates. Our detailed analysis also revealed that users remained unaware of inaccuracies in the LLM's responses, indicating a gap between their lack of software expertise and their ability to evaluate the LLM's assistance. With the growing push for designing domain-specific LLM assistants, we emphasize the importance of incorporating explainable, context-aware cues into LLMs to help users understand prompt-based interactions, identify biases, and maximize the utility of LLM assistants.

With the rapid development of large language models, AI assistants like ChatGPT have widely entered people's works and lives. In this paper, we present an evolving large language model assistant that utilizes verbal long-term memory. It focuses on preserving the knowledge and experience from the history dialogue between the user and AI assistant, which can be applied to future dialogue for generating a better response. The model generates a set of records for each finished dialogue and stores them in the memory. In later usage, given a new user input, the model uses it to retrieve its related memory to improve the quality of the response. To find the best form of memory, we explore different ways of constructing the memory and propose a new memorizing mechanism called conditional memory to solve the problems in previous methods. We also investigate the retrieval and usage of memory in the generation process. The assistant uses GPT-4 as the backbone and we evaluate it on three constructed test datasets focusing on different abilities required by an AI assistant with long-term memory.

Over the past decade, there has been extensive research aimed at enhancing the robustness of neural networks, yet this problem remains vastly unsolved. Here, one major impediment has been the overestimation of the robustness of new defense approaches due to faulty defense evaluations. Flawed robustness evaluations necessitate rectifications in subsequent works, dangerously slowing down the research and providing a false sense of security. In this context, we will face substantial challenges associated with an impending adversarial arms race in natural language processing, specifically with closed-source Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, Google Bard, or Anthropic's Claude. We provide a first set of prerequisites to improve the robustness assessment of new approaches and reduce the amount of faulty evaluations. Additionally, we identify embedding space attacks on LLMs as another viable threat model for the purposes of generating malicious content in open-sourced models. Finally, we demonstrate on a recently proposed defense that, without LLM-specific best practices in place, it is easy to overestimate the robustness of a new approach.

Today, users ask Large language models (LLMs) as assistants to answer queries that require external knowledge; they ask about the weather in a specific city, about stock prices, and even about where specific locations are within their neighborhood. These queries require the LLM to produce code that invokes external APIs to answer the user's question, yet LLMs rarely produce correct code on the first try, requiring iterative code refinement upon execution results. In addition, using LLM assistants to support high query volumes can be expensive. In this work, we contribute a framework, EcoAssistant, that enables LLMs to answer code-driven queries more affordably and accurately. EcoAssistant contains three components. First, it allows the LLM assistants to converse with an automatic code executor to iteratively refine code or to produce answers based on the execution results. Second, we use a hierarchy of LLM assistants, which attempts to answer the query with weaker, cheaper LLMs before backing off to stronger, expensive ones. Third, we retrieve solutions from past successful queries as in-context demonstrations to help subsequent queries. Empirically, we show that EcoAssistant offers distinct advantages for affordability and accuracy, surpassing GPT-4 by 10 points of success rate with less than 50% of GPT-4's cost.

Employing Large Language Models (LLMs) to address mathematical problems is an intriguing research endeavor, considering the abundance of math problems expressed in natural language across numerous science and engineering fields. While several prior works have investigated solving elementary mathematics using LLMs, this work explores the frontier of using GPT-4 for solving more complex and challenging math problems. We evaluate various ways of using GPT-4. Some of them are adapted from existing work, and one is MathChat, a conversational problem-solving framework newly proposed in this work. We perform the evaluation on difficult high school competition problems from the MATH dataset, which shows the advantage of the proposed conversational approach.