Personalisation within bounds: A risk taxonomy and policy framework for the alignment of large language models with personalised feedback
Large language models (LLMs) are used to generate content for a wide range of tasks, and are set to reach a growing audience in coming years due to integration in product interfaces like ChatGPT or search engines like Bing. This intensifies the need to ensure that models are aligned with human preferences and do not produce unsafe, inaccurate or toxic outputs. While alignment techniques like reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) and red-teaming can mitigate some safety concerns and improve model capabilities, it is unlikely that an aggregate fine-tuning process can adequately represent the full range of users' preferences and values. Different people may legitimately disagree on their preferences for language and conversational norms, as well as on values or ideologies which guide their communication. Personalising LLMs through micro-level preference learning processes may result in models that are better aligned with each user. However, there are several normative challenges in defining the bounds of a societally-acceptable and safe degree of personalisation. In this paper, we ask how, and in what ways, LLMs should be personalised. First, we review literature on current paradigms for aligning LLMs with human feedback, and identify issues including (i) a lack of clarity regarding what alignment means; (ii) a tendency of technology providers to prescribe definitions of inherently subjective preferences and values; and (iii) a 'tyranny of the crowdworker', exacerbated by a lack of documentation in who we are really aligning to. Second, we present a taxonomy of benefits and risks associated with personalised LLMs, for individuals and society at large. Finally, we propose a three-tiered policy framework that allows users to experience the benefits of personalised alignment, while restraining unsafe and undesirable LLM-behaviours within (supra-)national and organisational bounds.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Red TeamingSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Responsible Personalisation: The Double-Edged Sword of Personalisation in Human-Robot Interaction
While personalisation is becoming a defining capability in human-robot interaction (HRI), the existing literature on responsible personalisation remains fragmented, offering isolated accounts of ethical risks without a s…
You can't see what you can't see: Experimental evidence for how much relevant information may be missed due to Google's Web search personalisation
The influence of Web search personalisation on professional knowledge work is an understudied area. Here we investigate how public sector officials self-assess their dependency on the Google Web search engine, whether th…
Decision MakingFrom Lived Experience to Insight: Unpacking the Psychological Risks of Using AI Conversational Agents
Recent gains in popularity of AI conversational agents have led to their increased use for improving productivity and supporting well-being. While previous research has aimed to understand the risks associated with inter…
Proceeding of the 1st Workshop on Social Robots Personalisation At the crossroads between engineering and humanities (CONCATENATE)
Nowadays, robots are expected to interact more physically, cognitively, and socially with people. They should adapt to unpredictable contexts alongside individuals with various behaviours. For this reason, personalisatio…
AttributeTASRA: a Taxonomy and Analysis of Societal-Scale Risks from AI
While several recent works have identified societal-scale and extinction-level risks to humanity arising from artificial intelligence, few have attempted an {\em exhaustive taxonomy} of such risks. Many exhaustive taxono…