Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Jeffrey Wu

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.

5 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

5

TMLR Journal 2025 Journal Article

Open Problems in Mechanistic Interpretability

  • Lee Sharkey
  • Bilal Chughtai
  • Joshua Batson
  • Jack Lindsey
  • Jeffrey Wu
  • Lucius Bushnaq
  • Nicholas Goldowsky-Dill
  • Stefan Heimersheim

Mechanistic interpretability aims to understand the computational mechanisms underlying neural networks' capabilities in order to accomplish concrete scientific and engineering goals. Progress in this field thus promises to provide greater assurance over AI system behavior and shed light on exciting scientific questions about the nature of intelligence. Despite recent progress toward these goals, there are many open problems in the field that require solutions before many scientific and practical benefits can be realized: Our methods require both conceptual and practical improvements to reveal deeper insights; we must figure out how best to apply our methods in pursuit of specific goals; and the field must grapple with socio-technical challenges that influence and are influenced by our work. This forward-facing review discusses the current frontier of mechanistic interpretability and the open problems that the field may benefit from prioritizing.

ICRA Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Open X-Embodiment: Robotic Learning Datasets and RT-X Models: Open X-Embodiment Collaboration

  • Abby O'Neill
  • Abdul Rehman
  • Abhiram Maddukuri
  • Abhishek Gupta 0004
  • Abhishek Padalkar
  • Abraham Lee
  • Acorn Pooley
  • Agrim Gupta

Large, high-capacity models trained on diverse datasets have shown remarkable successes on efficiently tackling downstream applications. In domains from NLP to Computer Vision, this has led to a consolidation of pretrained models, with general pretrained backbones serving as a starting point for many applications. Can such a consolidation happen in robotics? Conventionally, robotic learning methods train a separate model for every application, every robot, and even every environment. Can we instead train "generalist" X-robot policy that can be adapted efficiently to new robots, tasks, and environments? In this paper, we provide datasets in standardized data formats and models to make it possible to explore this possibility in the context of robotic manipulation, alongside experimental results that provide an example of effective X-robot policies. We assemble a dataset from 22 different robots collected through a collaboration between 21 institutions, demonstrating 527 skills (160266 tasks). We show that a high-capacity model trained on this data, which we call RT-X, exhibits positive transfer and improves the capabilities of multiple robots by leveraging experience from other platforms. The project website is robotics-transformer-x. github.io.

NeurIPS Conference 2022 Conference Paper

Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback

  • Long Ouyang
  • Jeffrey Wu
  • Xu Jiang
  • Diogo Almeida
  • Carroll Wainwright
  • Pamela Mishkin
  • Chong Zhang
  • Sandhini Agarwal

Making language models bigger does not inherently make them better at following a user's intent. For example, large language models can generate outputs that are untruthful, toxic, or simply not helpful to the user. In other words, these models are not aligned with their users. In this paper, we show an avenue for aligning language models with user intent on a wide range of tasks by fine-tuning with human feedback. Starting with a set of labeler-written prompts and prompts submitted through a language model API, we collect a dataset of labeler demonstrations of the desired model behavior, which we use to fine-tune GPT-3 using supervised learning. We then collect a dataset of rankings of model outputs, which we use to further fine-tune this supervised model using reinforcement learning from human feedback. We call the resulting models InstructGPT. In human evaluations on our prompt distribution, outputs from the 1. 3B parameter InstructGPT model are preferred to outputs from the 175B GPT-3, despite having 100x fewer parameters. Moreover, InstructGPT models show improvements in truthfulness and reductions in toxic output generation while having minimal performance regressions on public NLP datasets. Even though InstructGPT still makes simple mistakes, our results show that fine-tuning with human feedback is a promising direction for aligning language models with human intent.

NeurIPS Conference 2020 Conference Paper

Language Models are Few-Shot Learners

  • Tom Brown
  • Benjamin Mann
  • Nick Ryder
  • Melanie Subbiah
  • Jared D Kaplan
  • Prafulla Dhariwal
  • Arvind Neelakantan
  • Pranav Shyam

We demonstrate that scaling up language models greatly improves task-agnostic, few-shot performance, sometimes even becoming competitive with prior state-of-the-art fine-tuning approaches. Specifically, we train GPT-3, an autoregressive language model with 175 billion parameters, 10x more than any previous non-sparse language model, and test its performance in the few-shot setting. For all tasks, GPT-3 is applied without any gradient updates or fine-tuning, with tasks and few-shot demonstrations specified purely via text interaction with the model. GPT-3 achieves strong performance on many NLP datasets, including translation, question-answering, and cloze tasks. We also identify some datasets where GPT-3's few-shot learning still struggles, as well as some datasets where GPT-3 faces methodological issues related to training on large web corpora.

NeurIPS Conference 2020 Conference Paper

Learning to summarize with human feedback

  • Nisan Stiennon
  • Long Ouyang
  • Jeffrey Wu
  • Daniel Ziegler
  • Ryan Lowe
  • Chelsea Voss
  • Alec Radford
  • Dario Amodei

As language models become more powerful, training and evaluation are increasingly bottlenecked by the data and metrics used for a particular task. For example, summarization models are often trained to predict human reference summaries and evaluated using ROUGE, but both of these metrics are rough proxies for what we really care about---summary quality. In this work, we show that it is possible to significantly improve summary quality by training a model to optimize for human preferences. We collect a large, high-quality dataset of human comparisons between summaries, train a model to predict the human-preferred summary, and use that model as a reward function to fine-tune a summarization policy using reinforcement learning. We apply our method to a version of the TL; DR dataset of Reddit posts and find that our models significantly outperform both human reference summaries and much larger models fine-tuned with supervised learning alone. Our models also transfer to CNN/DM news articles, producing summaries nearly as good as the human reference without any news-specific fine-tuning. We conduct extensive analyses to understand our human feedback dataset and fine-tuned models. We establish that our reward model generalizes to new datasets, and that optimizing our reward model results in better summaries than optimizing ROUGE according to humans. We hope the evidence from our paper motivates machine learning researchers to pay closer attention to how their training loss affects the model behavior they actually want.

v2026.09.13