LLM Critics Help Catch LLM Bugs
<|reference_start|>LLM Critics Help Catch LLM Bugs: Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is fundamentally limited by the capacity of humans to correctly evaluate model output. To improve human evaluation ability and overcome that limitation this work trains "critic" models that help humans to more accurately evaluate model-written code. These critics are themselves LLMs trained with RLHF to write natural language feedback highlighting problems in code from real-world assistant tasks. On code containing naturally occurring LLM errors model-written critiques are preferred over human critiques in 63% of cases, and human evaluation finds that models catch more bugs than human contractors paid for code review. We further confirm that our fine-tuned LLM critics can successfully identify hundreds of errors in ChatGPT training data rated as "flawless", even though the majority of those tasks are non-code tasks and thus out-of-distribution for the critic model. Critics can have limitations of their own, including hallucinated bugs that could mislead humans into making mistakes they might have otherwise avoided, but human-machine teams of critics and contractors catch similar numbers of bugs to LLM critics while hallucinating less than LLMs alone.<|reference_end|>
@article{mcaleese2024llm,
    title={LLM Critics Help Catch LLM Bugs},
    author={Nat McAleese, Rai Michael Pokorny, Juan Felipe Ceron Uribe, Evgenia
  Nitishinskaya, Maja Trebacz, Jan Leike},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.00215},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2407.00215},
    primaryClass={cs.SE cs.LG}
}