Emergent and Predictable Memorization in Large Language Models

Memorization, or the tendency of large language models (LLMs) to output entire sequences from their training data verbatim, is a key concern for safely deploying language models. In particular, it is vital to minimize a model's memorization of sensitive datapoints such as those containing personal identifiable information (PII). The prevalence of such undesirable memorization can pose issues for model trainers, and may even require discarding an otherwise functional model. We therefore seek to predict which sequences will be memorized before a large model's full train-time by extrapolating the memorization behavior of lower-compute trial runs. We measure memorization of the Pythia model suite, and find that intermediate checkpoints are better predictors of a model's memorization behavior than smaller fully-trained models. We additionally provide further novel discoveries on the distribution of memorization scores across models and data.

LEACE: Perfect linear concept erasure in closed form

Concept erasure aims to remove specified features from a neural representation. It can be used to improve fairness (e.g. preventing a model from using gender or race) and interpretability (e.g. removing a concept to observe changes in model behavior). In this paper, we introduce LEAst-squares Concept Erasure (LEACE), a fast closed-form method which provably prevents all linear classifiers from detecting a concept while inflicting the least possible damage to the representation. We apply LEACE to large language models with a novel procedure called “concept scrubbing,” which erases information about the target concept from every hidden layer in the network. We demonstrate the usefulness of our method on two tasks: measuring the extent to which language models rely on part-of-speech information, and reducing gender bias in BERT embeddings.

The Goldilocks of Pragmatic Understanding: Fine-Tuning Strategy Matters for Implicature Resolution by LLMs

Despite widespread use of LLMs as conversational agents, evaluations of performance fail to capture a crucial aspect of communication: interpreting language in context---incorporating its pragmatics. Humans interpret language using beliefs and prior knowledge about the world. For example, we intuitively understand the response "I wore gloves" to the question "Did you leave fingerprints?" as meaning "No". To investigate whether LLMs have the ability to make this type of inference, known as an implicature, we design a simple task and evaluate four categories of widely used state-of-the-art models. We find that, despite only evaluating on utterances that require a binary inference (yes or no), models in three of these categories perform close to random. However, LLMs instruction-tuned at the example-level perform significantly better. These results suggest that certain fine-tuning strategies are far better at inducing pragmatic understanding in models. We present our findings as the starting point for further research into evaluating how LLMs interpret language in context and to drive the development of more pragmatic and useful models of human discourse.