NATO’s Defense Math Does Not Add Up

The United States is by far the largest contributor to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) operations. According to NATO estimates published in June 2024, the United States will spend $967.7 billion on defense in 2024, roughly 10 times as much as Germany, the second-largest spending country, with $97.7 billion. Total NATO military expenditures for 2024 are estimated at $1.474.4 […]

NATO’s Defense Math Does Not Add Up was originally published on Global Security Review.

October 3, 2024
Read More >>

Re-Redefining Document Review: Then and Now

In our constantly changing world of legal services, innovation is not just a competitive edge, it’s essential for success. Our Military Spouse Managed Review (MSMR) team has always strived to be ahead of the curve, redefining what document review looks and feels like—whether it was the shift to remote review in 2017 or the integration […]

The post Re-Redefining Document Review: Then and Now appeared first on TCDI.

September 19, 2024
Read More >>

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Reward Modeling of Generative AI Systems

New research evaluating the effectiveness of reward modeling during Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF): “SEAL: Systematic Error Analysis for Value ALignment.” The paper introduces quantitative metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of modeling and aligning human values:

Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) aims to align language models (LMs) with human values by training reward models (RMs) on binary preferences and using these RMs to fine-tune the base LMs. Despite its importance, the internal mechanisms of RLHF remain poorly understood. This paper introduces new metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of modeling and aligning human values, namely feature imprint, alignment resistance and alignment robustness. We categorize alignment datasets into target features (desired values) and spoiler features (undesired concepts). By regressing RM scores against these features, we quantify the extent to which RMs reward them ­ a metric we term feature imprint. We define alignment resistance as the proportion of the preference dataset where RMs fail to match human preferences, and we assess alignment robustness by analyzing RM responses to perturbed inputs. Our experiments, utilizing open-source components like the Anthropic preference dataset and OpenAssistant RMs, reveal significant imprints of target features and a notable sensitivity to spoiler features. We observed a 26% incidence of alignment resistance in portions of the dataset where LM-labelers disagreed with human preferences. Furthermore, we find that misalignment often arises from ambiguous entries within the alignment dataset. These findings underscore the importance of scrutinizing both RMs and alignment datasets for a deeper understanding of value alignment…

September 11, 2024
Read More >>

Why Should eDiscovery Teams Care About Gen AI?

It’s not uncommon to be skeptical or curious about new technology. In the legal industry, that caution and curiosity are an integral part of the job. eDiscovery teams in particular must have a strong understanding of a technology’s capabilities and limitations. They must also understand how it works, to a degree, before ever implementing it […]

The post Why Should eDiscovery Teams Care About Gen AI? appeared first on TCDI.

August 22, 2024
Read More >>