Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Hannah Sheahan

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.

3 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

3

NeurIPS Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Fine-tuning language models to find agreement among humans with diverse preferences

  • Michiel Bakker
  • Martin Chadwick
  • Hannah Sheahan
  • Michael Tessler
  • Lucy Campbell-Gillingham
  • Jan Balaguer
  • Nat McAleese
  • Amelia Glaese

Recent work in large language modeling (LLMs) has used fine-tuning to align outputs with the preferences of a prototypical user. This work assumes that human preferences are static and homogeneous across individuals, so that aligning to a single "generic" user will confer more general alignment. Here, we embrace the heterogeneity of human preferences to consider a different challenge: how might a machine help people with diverse views find agreement? We fine-tune a 70 billion parameter LLM to generate statements that maximize the expected approval for a group of people with potentially diverse opinions. Human participants provide written opinions on thousands of questions touching on moral and political issues (e. g. , "should we raise taxes on the rich? "), and rate the LLM's generated candidate consensus statements for agreement and quality. A reward model is then trained to predict individual preferences, enabling it to quantify and rank consensus statements in terms of their appeal to the overall group, defined according to different aggregation (social welfare) functions. The model produces consensus statements that are preferred by human users over those from prompted LLMs ($>70\%$) and significantly outperforms a tight fine-tuned baseline that lacks the final ranking step. Further, our best model's consensus statements are preferred over the best human-generated opinions ($>65\%$). We find that when we silently constructed consensus statements from only a subset of group members, those who were excluded were more likely to dissent, revealing the sensitivity of the consensus to individual contributions. These results highlight the potential to use LLMs to help groups of humans align their values with one another.

ICML Conference 2022 Conference Paper

General-purpose, long-context autoregressive modeling with Perceiver AR

  • Curtis Hawthorne
  • Andrew Jaegle
  • Catalina Cangea
  • Sebastian Borgeaud
  • Charlie Nash
  • Mateusz Malinowski
  • Sander Dieleman
  • Oriol Vinyals

Real-world data is high-dimensional: a book, image, or musical performance can easily contain hundreds of thousands of elements even after compression. However, the most commonly used autoregressive models, Transformers, are prohibitively expensive to scale to the number of inputs and layers needed to capture this long-range structure. We develop Perceiver AR, an autoregressive, modality-agnostic architecture which uses cross-attention to map long-range inputs to a small number of latents while also maintaining end-to-end causal masking. Perceiver AR can directly attend to over a hundred thousand tokens, enabling practical long-context density estimation without the need for hand-crafted sparsity patterns or memory mechanisms. When trained on images or music, Perceiver AR generates outputs with clear long-term coherence and structure. Our architecture also obtains state-of-the-art likelihood on long-sequence benchmarks, including 64x64 ImageNet images and PG-19 books.

AAAI Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Role of Human-AI Interaction in Selective Prediction

  • Elizabeth Bondi
  • Raphael Koster
  • Hannah Sheahan
  • Martin Chadwick
  • Yoram Bachrach
  • Taylan Cemgil
  • Ulrich Paquet
  • Krishnamurthy Dvijotham

Recent work has shown the potential benefit of selective prediction systems that can learn to defer to a human when the predictions of the AI are unreliable, particularly to improve the reliability of AI systems in high-stakes applications like healthcare or conservation. However, most prior work assumes that human behavior remains unchanged when they solve a prediction task as part of a human-AI team as opposed to by themselves. We show that this is not the case by performing experiments to quantify human-AI interaction in the context of selective prediction. In particular, we study the impact of communicating different types of information to humans about the AI system’s decision to defer. Using realworld conservation data and a selective prediction system that improves expected accuracy over that of the human or AI system working individually, we show that this messaging has a significant impact on the accuracy of human judgements. Our results study two components of the messaging strategy: 1) Whether humans are informed about the prediction of the AI system and 2) Whether they are informed about the decision of the selective prediction system to defer. By manipulating these messaging components, we show that it is possible to significantly boost human performance by informing the human of the decision to defer, but not revealing the prediction of the AI. We therefore show that it is vital to consider how the decision to defer is communicated to a human when designing selective prediction systems, and that the composite accuracy of a human-AI team must be carefully evaluated using a human-in-the-loop framework.