arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2402.07282cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG

大型语言模型如何应对诚实与有用性之间的冲突?

How do Large Language Models Navigate Conflicts between Honesty and Helpfulness?

Princeton University(普林斯顿大学);Google DeepMind(谷歌DeepMind)

Ryan Liu, Theodore R. Sumers, Ishita Dasgupta, Thomas L. Griffiths

AI总结:

本研究利用心理模型和实验分析LLMs在诚实与有用性间的权衡,发现RLHF能同时提升两者,而CoT提示偏向有用性,GPT-4 Turbo表现出类似人类的响应模式且可通过零样本提示引导其抽象价值观。

摘要:

在日常交流中,人们常常为了对听者最大程度地提供帮助而近似真相,例如将时间取整或省略细节。大型语言模型(LLMs)如何处理这种微妙的权衡?为了解决这个问题,我们使用旨在表征人类行为的心理模型和实验来分析LLMs。我们测试了一系列LLMs,并探讨了针对人类偏好的优化或推理时推理如何影响这些权衡。我们发现,来自人类反馈的强化学习同时提高了诚实性和有用性,而思维链提示则使LLMs偏向有用性而非诚实性。最后,GPT-4 Turbo展示了类似人类的响应模式,包括对对话框架和听者决策语境的敏感性。我们的发现揭示了LLMs内化的对话价值观,并表明即使是这些抽象价值观,在某种程度上也可以通过零样本提示来引导。

英文摘要:

In day-to-day communication, people often approximate the truth - for example, rounding the time or omitting details - in order to be maximally helpful to the listener. How do large language models (LLMs) handle such nuanced trade-offs? To address this question, we use psychological models and experiments designed to characterize human behavior to analyze LLMs. We test a range of LLMs and explore how optimization for human preferences or inference-time reasoning affects these trade-offs. We find that reinforcement learning from human feedback improves both honesty and helpfulness, while chain-of-thought prompting skews LLMs towards helpfulness over honesty. Finally, GPT-4 Turbo demonstrates human-like response patterns including sensitivity to the conversational framing and listener's decision context. Our findings reveal the conversational values internalized by LLMs and suggest that even these abstract values can, to a degree, be steered by zero-shot prompting.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑