Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Allyson Ettinger

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

6 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

6

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

AI as Humanity's Salieri: Quantifying Linguistic Creativity of Language Models via Systematic Attribution of Machine Text against Web Text

  • Ximing Lu
  • Melanie Sclar
  • Skyler Hallinan
  • Niloofar Mireshghallah
  • Jiacheng Liu 0010
  • Seungju Han 0002
  • Allyson Ettinger
  • Liwei Jiang

Creativity has long been considered one of the most difficult aspect of human intelligence for AI to mimic. However, the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs), like ChatGPT, has raised questions about whether AI can match or even surpass human creativity. We present CREATIVITY INDEX as the first step to quantify the linguistic creativity of a text by reconstructing it from existing text snippets on the web. CREATIVITY INDEX is motivated by the hypothesis that the seemingly remarkable creativity of LLMs may be attributable in large part to the creativity of human-written texts on the web. To compute CREATIVITY INDEX efficiently, we introduce DJ SEARCH, a novel dynamic programming algorithm that can search verbatim and near-verbatim matches of text snippets from a given document against the web. Experiments reveal that the CREATIVITY INDEX of professional human authors is on average 66.2% higher than that of LLMs, and that alignment reduces the CREATIVITY INDEX of LLMs by an average of 30.1%. In addition, we find that distinguished authors like Hemingway exhibit measurably higher CREATIVITY INDEX compared to other human writers. Finally, we demonstrate that CREATIVITY INDEX can be used as a surprisingly effective criterion for zero-shot machine text detection, surpassing the strongest existing zero-shot system, DetectGPT, by a significant margin of 30.2%, and even outperforming the strongest supervised system, GhostBuster, in five out of six domains.

NeurIPS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

FlexOLMo: Open Language Models for Flexible Data Use

  • Weijia Shi
  • Akshita Bhagia
  • Kevin Farhat
  • Niklas Muennighoff
  • Jacob Morrison
  • Evan Walsh
  • Dustin Schwenk
  • Shayne Longpre

We introduce FlexOLMo, a new class of language models (LMs) that supports (1) distributed training without data sharing, where different model parameters are independently trained on private datasets, and (2) data-flexible inference, where these parameters along with their associated data can be easily included or excluded from model inferences with no further training. FlexOLMo employs a mixture-of-experts (MoE) architecture where each expert is trained independently on private datasets and later integrated through a new nonparametric routing without any joint training across datasets. FlexOLMo is trained on FLEXMIX, a corpus we curate comprising seven restricted sets, either real or realistic approximations, alongside publicly available datasets. We evaluate models with up to 37 billion parameters (20 billion active) on 31 diverse downstream tasks. We show that a general expert trained on public data can be effectively combined with independently trained experts from other data owners significantly benefiting from these restricted sets (an average 41% relative improvement) while allowing flexible opt-out at inference time (e. g. , for users without appropriate licenses or permissions). Our approach also outperforms prior model merging methods by 10. 1% on average and surpasses the standard MoE trained without data restrictions using the same training FLOPs. Altogether, FlexOLMo enables training on restricted data while keeping data local and supports fine-grained control of data access at inference.

ICLR Conference 2024 Conference Paper

The Generative AI Paradox: "What It Can Create, It May Not Understand"

  • Peter West
  • Ximing Lu
  • Nouha Dziri
  • Faeze Brahman
  • Linjie Li
  • Jena D. Hwang
  • Liwei Jiang
  • Jillian Fisher

The recent wave of generative AI has sparked unprecedented global attention, with both excitement and concern over potentially superhuman levels of artificial intelligence: models now take only seconds to produce outputs that would challenge or exceed the capabilities even of expert humans. At the same time, models still show basic errors in understanding that would not be expected even in non-expert humans. This presents us with an apparent paradox: how do we reconcile seemingly superhuman capabilities with the persistence of errors that few humans would make? In this work, we posit that this tension reflects a divergence in the configuration of intelligence in today's generative models relative to intelligence in humans. Specifically, we propose and test the **Generative AI Paradox** hypothesis: generative models, having been trained directly to reproduce expert-like outputs, acquire generative capabilities that are not contingent upon---and can therefore exceed---their ability to understand those same types of outputs. This contrasts with humans, for whom basic understanding almost always precedes the ability to generate expert-level outputs. We test this hypothesis through controlled experiments analyzing generation vs.~understanding in generative models, across both language and image modalities. Our results show that although models can outperform humans in generation, they consistently fall short of human capabilities in measures of understanding, as well as weaker correlation between generation and understanding performance, and more brittleness to adversarial inputs. Our findings support the hypothesis that models' generative capability may not be contingent upon understanding capability, and call for caution in interpreting artificial intelligence by analogy to human intelligence.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

WildGuard: Open One-stop Moderation Tools for Safety Risks, Jailbreaks, and Refusals of LLMs

  • Seungju Han
  • Kavel Rao
  • Allyson Ettinger
  • Liwei Jiang
  • Bill Yuchen Lin
  • Nathan Lambert
  • Yejin Choi
  • Nouha Dziri

We introduce WildGuard---an open, light-weight moderation tool for LLM safety that achieves three goals: (1) identifying malicious intent in user prompts, (2) detecting safety risks of model responses, and (3) determining model refusal rate. Together, WildGuard serves the increasing needs for automatic safety moderation and evaluation of LLM interactions, providing a one-stop tool with enhanced accuracy and broad coverage across 13 risk categories. While existing open moderation tools such as Llama-Guard2 score reasonably well in classifying straightforward model interactions, they lag far behind a prompted GPT-4, especially in identifying adversarial jailbreaks and in evaluating models' refusals, a key measure for evaluating safety behaviors in model responses. To address these challenges, we construct WildGuardMix, a large-scale and carefully balanced multi-task safety moderation dataset with 92K labeled examples that cover vanilla (direct) prompts and adversarial jailbreaks, paired with various refusal and compliance responses. WildGuardMix is a combination of WildGuardTrain, the training data of WildGuard, and WildGuardTest, a high-quality human-annotated moderation test set with 5K labeled items covering broad risk scenarios. Through extensive evaluations on WildGuardTest and ten existing public benchmarks, we show that WildGuard establishes state-of-the-art performance in open-source safety moderation across all the three tasks compared to ten strong existing open-source moderation models (e. g. , up to 25. 3% improvement on refusal detection). Importantly, WildGuard matches and sometimes exceeds GPT-4 performance (e. g. , up to 4. 8% improvement on prompt harmfulness identification). WildGuard serves as a highly effective safety moderator in an LLM interface, reducing the success rate of jailbreak attacks from 79. 8% to 2. 4%. We will make all our data, models and training/evaluation code publicly available under CC BY 4. 0 license.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

WildTeaming at Scale: From In-the-Wild Jailbreaks to (Adversarially) Safer Language Models

  • Liwei Jiang
  • Kavel Rao
  • Seungju Han
  • Allyson Ettinger
  • Faeze Brahman
  • Sachin Kumar
  • Niloofar Mireshghallah
  • Ximing Lu

We introduce WildTeaming, an automatic red-teaming framework that mines in-the-wild user-chatbot interactions to discover 5. 7K unique clusters of novel jailbreak tactics, and then composes selections of multiple mined tactics for systematic exploration of novel and even more challenging jailbreaks. Compared to prior work that performed red-teaming via recruited human workers, gradient-based optimization, or iterative revision with large language models (LLMs), our work investigates jailbreaks from chatbot users in-the-wild who were not specifically instructed to break the system. WildTeaming reveals previously unidentified vulnerabilities of frontier LLMs, resulting in more diverse and successful adversarial attacks compared to state-of-the-art jailbreaking methods. While there exist many datasets for jailbreak evaluation, very few open-source datasets exist for jailbreak training, as safety training data has been closed among all frontier models even when their weights are open. Therefore, with WildTeaming we create WildJailbreak, a large-scale open-source synthetic safety dataset with 262K vanilla (direct request) and adversarial (complex jailbreak) prompt-response pairs. In order to mitigate exaggerated safety behaviors, WildJailbreak provides two contrastive types of queries: 1) harmful queries (both vanilla and adversarial) and 2) benign queries that resemble harmful queries in form but contain no harmful intent. As WildJailbreak considerably upgrades the quality and scale of existing safety resources, it uniquely enables us to examine the scaling effects of data and the interplay of data properties and model capabilities during safety training. Through extensive model training and evaluations, we identify the training properties that enable an ideal balance of safety behaviors: appropriate safeguarding without over-refusal, effective handling of both vanilla and adversarial queries, and minimal, if any, decrease in general capabilities. All the components of WildJailbreak contribute to achieving balanced safety behaviors of models

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Faith and Fate: Limits of Transformers on Compositionality

  • Nouha Dziri
  • Ximing Lu
  • Melanie Sclar
  • Xiang (Lorraine) Li
  • Liwei Jiang
  • Bill Yuchen Lin
  • Sean Welleck
  • Peter West

Transformer large language models (LLMs) have sparked admiration for their exceptional performance on tasks that demand intricate multi-step reasoning. Yet, these models simultaneously show failures on surprisingly trivial problems. This begs the question: Are these errors incidental, or do they signal more substantial limitations? In an attempt to demystify transformer LLMs, we investigate the limits of these models across three representative compositional tasks---multi-digit multiplication, logic grid puzzles, and a classic dynamic programming problem. These tasks require breaking problems down into sub-steps and synthesizing these steps into a precise answer. We formulate compositional tasks as computation graphs to systematically quantify the level of complexity, and break down reasoning steps into intermediate sub-procedures. Our empirical findings suggest that transformer LLMs solve compositional tasks by reducing multi-step compositional reasoning into linearized subgraph matching, without necessarily developing systematic problem-solving skills. To round off our empirical study, we provide theoretical arguments on abstract multi-step reasoning problems that highlight how autoregressive generations' performance can rapidly decay with increased task complexity.

v2026.09.13