REVIEW 3 cited by
How Far Can Camels Go? Exploring the State of Instruction Tuning on Open Resources
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In this work we explore recent advances in instruction-tuning language models on a range of open instruction-following datasets. Despite recent claims that open models can be on par with state-of-the-art proprietary models, these claims are often accompanied by limited evaluation, making it difficult to compare models across the board and determine the utility of various resources. We provide a large set of instruction-tuned models from 6.7B to 65B parameters in size, trained on 12 instruction datasets ranging from manually curated (e.g., OpenAssistant) to synthetic and distilled (e.g., Alpaca) and systematically evaluate them on their factual knowledge, reasoning, multilinguality, coding, and open-ended instruction following abilities through a collection of automatic, model-based, and human-based metrics. We further introduce T\"ulu, our best performing instruction-tuned model suite finetuned on a combination of high-quality open resources. Our experiments show that different instruction-tuning datasets can uncover or enhance specific skills, while no single dataset (or combination) provides the best performance across all evaluations. Interestingly, we find that model and human preference-based evaluations fail to reflect differences in model capabilities exposed by benchmark-based evaluations, suggesting the need for the type of systemic evaluation performed in this work. Our evaluations show that the best model in any given evaluation reaches on average 87% of ChatGPT performance, and 73% of GPT-4 performance, suggesting that further investment in building better base models and instruction-tuning data is required to close the gap. We release our instruction-tuned models, including a fully finetuned 65B T\"ulu, along with our code, data, and evaluation framework at https://github.com/allenai/open-instruct to facilitate future research.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Decomposing Elements of Problem Solving: What "Math" Does RL Teach?
Reinforcement learning (GRPO) on math LLMs primarily increases execution robustness on already-solvable problems, not planning or coverage of new problems.
-
Improving Task Diversity in Label Efficient Supervised Finetuning of LLMs
Weighted Task Diversity allocates the annotation budget across tasks in inverse proportion to the base model's average confidence, improving MMLU and AlpacaEval scores with up to 80% fewer labels.
-
Improving LLM Safety and Helpfulness using SFT and DPO: A Study on OPT-350M
For OPT-350M on the Anthropic HH-RLHF set, SFT plus DPO gives the highest combined helpfulness/harmlessness score, but not the highest safety score.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.