Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Sarah Wiegreffe

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

Answer, Assemble, Ace: Understanding How LMs Answer Multiple Choice Questions

  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Oyvind Tafjord
  • Yonatan Belinkov
  • Hannaneh Hajishirzi
  • Ashish Sabharwal

Multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) is a key competence of performant transformer language models that is tested by mainstream benchmarks. However, recent evidence shows that models can have quite a range of performance, particularly when the task format is diversified slightly (such as by shuffling answer choice order). In this work we ask: how do successful models perform formatted MCQA? We employ vocabulary projection and activation patching methods to localize key hidden states that encode relevant information for predicting the correct answer. We find that prediction of a specific answer symbol is causally attributed to a few middle layers, and specifically their multi-head self-attention mechanisms. We show that subsequent layers increase the probability of the predicted answer symbol in vocabulary space, and that this probability increase is associated with a sparse set of attention heads with unique roles. We additionally uncover differences in how different models adjust to alternative symbols. Finally, we demonstrate that a synthetic task can disentangle sources of model error to pinpoint when a model has learned formatted MCQA, and show that logit differences between answer choice tokens continue to grow over the course of training.

ICML Conference 2025 Conference Paper

MIB: A Mechanistic Interpretability Benchmark

  • Aaron Mueller
  • Atticus Geiger
  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Dana Arad
  • Iván Arcuschin
  • Adam Belfki
  • Yik Siu Chan
  • Jaden Fried Fiotto-Kaufman

How can we know whether new mechanistic interpretability methods achieve real improvements? In pursuit of lasting evaluation standards, we propose MIB, a Mechanistic Interpretability Benchmark, with two tracks spanning four tasks and five models. MIB favors methods that precisely and concisely recover relevant causal pathways or causal variables in neural language models. The circuit localization track compares methods that locate the model components—and connections between them—most important for performing a task (e. g. , attribution patching or information flow routes). The causal variable track compares methods that featurize a hidden vector, e. g. , sparse autoencoders (SAE) or distributed alignment search (DAS), and align those features to a task-relevant causal variable. Using MIB, we find that attribution and mask optimization methods perform best on circuit localization. For causal variable localization, we find that the supervised DAS method performs best, while SAEs features are not better than neurons, i. e. , non-featurized hidden vectors. These findings illustrate that MIB enables meaningful comparisons, and increases our confidence that there has been real progress in the field.

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

On Linear Representations and Pretraining Data Frequency in Language Models

  • Jack Merullo
  • Noah A. Smith
  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Yanai Elazar

Pretraining data has a direct impact on the behaviors and quality of language models (LMs), but we only understand the most basic principles of this relationship. While most work focuses on pretraining data's effect on downstream task behavior, we investigate its relationship to LM representations. Previous work has discovered that, in language models, some concepts are encoded "linearly" in the representations, but what factors cause these representations to form (or not)? We study the connection between pretraining data frequency and models' linear representations of factual relations (e.g., mapping France to Paris in a capital prediction task). We find evidence that the formation of linear representations is strongly connected to pretraining term frequencies; specifically for subject-relation-object fact triplets, both subject-object co-occurrence frequency and in-context learning accuracy for the relation are highly correlated with linear representations. This is the case across all phases of pretraining, i.e., it is not affected by the model's underlying capability. In OLMo-7B and GPT-J (6B), we discover that a linear representation consistently (but not exclusively) forms when the subjects and objects within a relation co-occur at least 1k and 2k times, respectively, regardless of when these occurrences happen during pretraining (and around 4k times for OLMo-1B). Finally, we train a regression model on measurements of linear representation quality in fully-trained LMs that can predict how often a term was seen in pretraining. Our model achieves low error even on inputs from a different model with a different pretraining dataset, providing a new method for estimating properties of the otherwise-unknown training data of closed-data models. We conclude that the strength of linear representations in LMs contains signal about the models' pretraining corpora that may provide new avenues for controlling and improving model behavior: particularly, manipulating the models' training data to meet specific frequency thresholds. We release our code to support future work.

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

The Art of Saying No: Contextual Noncompliance in Language Models

  • Faeze Brahman
  • Sachin Kumar
  • Vidhisha Balachandran
  • Pradeep Dasigi
  • Valentina Pyatkin
  • Abhilasha Ravichander
  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Nouha Dziri

Chat-based language models are designed to be helpful, yet they should not comply with every user request. While most existing work primarily focuses on refusal of ``unsafe'' queries, we posit that the scope of noncompliance should be broadened. We introduce a comprehensive taxonomy of contextual noncompliance describing when and how models should not comply with user requests. Our taxonomy spans a wide range of categories including incomplete, unsupported, indeterminate, and humanizing requests (in addition to unsafe requests). To test noncompliance capabilities of language models, we use this taxonomy to develop a new evaluation suite of 1000 noncompliance prompts. We find that most existing models show significantly high compliance rates in certain previously understudied categories with models like GPT-4 incorrectly complying with as many as 30\% of requests. To address these gaps, we explore different training strategies using a synthetically-generated training set of requests and expected noncompliant responses. Our experiments demonstrate that while direct finetuning of instruction-tuned models can lead to both over-refusal and a decline in general capabilities, using parameter efficient methods like low rank adapters helps to strike a good balance between appropriate noncompliance and other capabilities.

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback

  • Aman Madaan
  • Niket Tandon
  • Prakhar Gupta
  • Skyler Hallinan
  • Luyu Gao
  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Uri Alon
  • Nouha Dziri

Like humans, large language models (LLMs) do not always generate the best output on their first try. Motivated by how humans refine their written text, we introduce Self-Refine, an approach for improving initial outputs from LLMs through iterative feedback and refinement. The main idea is to generate an initial output using an LLMs; then, the same LLMs provides *feedback* for its output and uses it to *refine* itself, iteratively. Self-Refine does not require any supervised training data, additional training, or reinforcement learning, and instead uses a single LLM as the generator, refiner and the feedback provider. We evaluate Self-Refine across 7 diverse tasks, ranging from dialog response generation to mathematical reasoning, using state-of-the-art (GPT-3. 5, ChatGPT, and GPT-4) LLMs. Across all evaluated tasks, outputs generated with Self-Refine are preferred by humans and automatic metrics over those generated with the same LLM using conventional one-step generation, improving by $\sim$20\% absolute on average in task performance. Our work demonstrates that even state-of-the-art LLMs like GPT-4 can be further improved at test-time using our simple, standalone approach.

NeurIPS Conference 2021 Conference Paper

Teach Me to Explain: A Review of Datasets for Explainable Natural Language Processing

  • Sarah Wiegreffe
  • Ana Marasovic

Explainable Natural Language Processing (ExNLP) has increasingly focused on collecting human-annotated textual explanations. These explanations are used downstream in three ways: as data augmentation to improve performance on a predictive task, as supervision to train models to produce explanations for their predictions, and as a ground-truth to evaluate model-generated explanations. In this review, we identify 65 datasets with three predominant classes of textual explanations (highlights, free-text, and structured), organize the literature on annotating each type, identify strengths and shortcomings of existing collection methodologies, and give recommendations for collecting ExNLP datasets in the future.

v2026.09.13