The Spread of False Information through LLMs

A new paper, 'A Drop of Ink may Make a Million Think: The Spread of False Information in Large Language Models', from the School of Computer Science and Technology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, and the Institute of Software, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing.

The presence of false information on the internet and in the text corpus poses a significant risk to the reliability and safety of LLMs. This paper investigates how false information spreads in LLMs and affects related responses. The authors conducted a series of experiments to study the effects of source authority, injection paradigm, and information relevance. They found that false information can spread and contaminate related memories in LLMs, and that LLMs are more likely to follow false information presented in a trustworthy style. The authors conclude that new false information defense algorithms are needed to address the global impact of false information, and that new alignment algorithms are needed to unbiasedly lead LLMs to follow internal human values rather than superficial patterns.

Key points from the paper:

False information can spread and contaminate related memories in LLMs.
LLMs are more likely to follow false information presented in a trustworthy style.
Current LLMs are more sensitive to false information through in-context injection than through learning-based injection.
The findings of this paper raise the need for new false information defense algorithms and new alignment algorithms.

False information will spread and contaminate related memories in LLMs via a semantic diffusion process, i.e., false information has global detrimental effects beyond its direct impact. The extent of pollution is contingent on the semantic association between the false information and the memory in the LLMs..., both ChatGPT and Alpaca-LLaMA exhibit significant drops in accuracy on all types of questions when exposed to false information.
ChatGPT’s accuracy drops to only 48.33% and 57.70% on indirect and peripheral questions, compared to over 95% accuracies without false information.

The paper only serves to highlight the issues of transparency in the data fed to LLMs, are you listening Google (and others)? This will be less of an issue for Open Source LLMs as they are transparent about the models.

Comments

The AI Dilemma and "Gollem-Class" AIs

From the Center for Humane Technology Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin discuss how existing A.I. capabilities already pose catastrophic risks to a functional society, how A.I. companies are caught in a race to deploy as quickly as possible without adequate safety measures, and what it would mean to upgrade our institutions to a post-A.I. world. This presentation is from a private gathering in San Francisco on March 9th with leading technologists and decision-makers with the ability to influence the future of large-language model A.I.s. This presentation was given before the launch of GPT-4. One of the more astute critics of the tech industry, Tristan Harris, who has recently given stark evidence to Congress. It is worth watching both of these videos, as the Congress address gives a context of PR industry and it's regular abuses. "If we understand the mechanisms and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their

Beware the Orca, the challenge to ChatGPT and Palm2 is here

So Google's 'we have no moat' paper was correct. If you train an LLM wisely then it's cost effective and cheap to produce a small LLM that is able to compete or even beat established, costly LLMs, as Microsoft has just found. It's another excellent video from AI Explained, who goes through some of the training procedures, which I won't get into here. Orca, is a model that learns from large foundation models (LFMs) like GPT-4 and ChatGPT by imitating their reasoning process. Orca uses rich signals such as explanations and complex instructions to improve its performance on various tasks. Orca outperforms other instruction-tuned models and achieves similar results to ChatGPT on zero-shot reasoning benchmarks and professional and academic exams. The paper suggests that learning from explanations is a promising way to enhance model skills. Smaller models are often overestimated in their abilities compared to LFMs, and need more rigorous evaluation methods. Explana

What is happening inside of the black box?

Neel Nanda is involved in Mechanistic Interpretability research at DeepMind, formerly of AnthropicAI, what's fascinating about the research conducted by Nanda is he gets to peer into the Black Box to figure out how different types of AI models work. Anyone concerned with AI should understand how important this is. In this video Nanda discusses some of his findings, including 'induction heads', which turn out to have some vital properties. Induction heads are a type of attention head that allows a language model to learn long-range dependencies in text. They do this by using a simple algorithm to complete token sequences like [A][B] ... [A] -> [B]. For example, if a model is given the sequence "The cat sat on the mat," it can use induction heads to predict that the word "mat" will be followed by the word "the". Induction heads were first discovered in 2022 by a team of researchers at OpenAI. They found that induction heads were present in

Charting the emergence of AGI?

Search This Blog