This paper introduces ConceptMath, a bilingual (English and Chinese), fine-grained benchmark that evaluates concept-wise mathematical reasoning of Large Language Models (LLMs). Unlike traditional benchmarks that evaluate general mathematical reasoning with an average accuracy, ConceptMath systemically organizes math problems under a hierarchy of math concepts, so that mathematical reasoning can be evaluated at different granularity with concept-wise accuracies. Based on our ConcepthMath, we then evaluate a broad range of LLMs, and we observe existing LLMs, though achieving high average accuracies on traditional benchmarks, exhibit significant performance variations across different math concepts and may even fail catastrophically on the most basic ones. Besides, we also introduce an efficient fine-tuning strategy to enhance the weaknesses of existing LLMs. Finally, we hope ConceptMath could guide the developers to understand the fine-grained mathematical abilities of their models and facilitate the growth of foundation models. Code is available at https://github.com/conceptmath/conceptmath.

A single language model, even when aligned with labelers through reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), may not suit all human preferences. Recent approaches therefore prefer customization, gathering multi-dimensional feedback, and creating distinct reward models for each dimension.Different language models are then optimized for various preferences using multi-objective RLHF (MORLHF) with varying reward weights.However, RL fine-tuning is unstable and resource-heavy, especially with diverse and usually conflicting objectives.In this paper, we present Multi-Objective Direct Preference Optimization (MODPO), an RL-free extension of Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) for multiple alignment objectives.Essentially, MODPO folds language modeling directly into reward modeling, training language models as implicit collective reward models that combine all objectives with specific weights. MODPO theoretically yields the same optimal solutions as MORLHF but is practically more stable and efficient.Empirical results in safety alignment and long-form question answering show that MODPO matches or outperforms existing methods, producing a Pareto front of language models catering to diverse preferences with three times less computational resources compared to MORLHF.Code is available at https://github.com/ZHZisZZ/modpo.

Large language models are typically fine-tuned to align with human preferences, but tuning large models is computationally intensive and complex. In this work, we introduce **Integrated Value Guidance (IVG)**, a method that uses implicit and explicit value functions to guide language model decoding at token and chunk-level respectively, efficiently aligning large language models purely at inference time.This approach circumvents the complexities of direct fine-tuning and outperforms traditional methods.Empirically, we demonstrate the versatility of IVG across various tasks. In controlled sentiment generation and summarization tasks, our method significantly improves the alignment of large models using inference-time guidance from **gpt2**-based value functions. Moreover, in a more challenging instruction-following benchmark AlpacaEval 2.0, we show that both specifically tuned and off-the-shelf value functions greatly improve the length-controlled win rates of large models against gpt-4-turbo (e.g., 19.51 % → 26.51% for **Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.2** and 25.58 % → 33.75 % for **Mixtral-8x7B-Instruct-v0.1** with Tulu guidance).

Large Language Models (LLMs) are now commonplace in conversation applications. However, their risks of misuse for generating harmful responses have raised serious societal concerns and spurred recent research on LLM conversation safety. Therefore, in this survey, we provide a comprehensive overview of recent studies, covering three critical aspects of LLM conversation safety: attacks, defenses, and evaluations. Our goal is to provide a structured summary that enhances understanding of LLM conversation safety and encourages further investigation into this important subject. For easy reference, we have categorized all the studies mentioned in this survey according to our taxonomy, available at: https://github.com/niconi19/LLM-conversation-safety.

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has drastically enhanced dialogue systems. However, comprehensively evaluating the dialogue abilities of LLMs remains a challenge. Previous benchmarks have primarily focused on single-turn dialogues or provided coarse-grained and incomplete assessments of multi-turn dialogues, overlooking the complexity and fine-grained nuances of real-life dialogues. To address this issue, we introduce MT-Bench-101, specifically designed to evaluate the fine-grained abilities of LLMs in multi-turn dialogues. By conducting a detailed analysis of real multi-turn dialogue data, we construct a three-tier hierarchical ability taxonomy comprising 4208 turns across 1388 multi-turn dialogues in 13 distinct tasks. We then evaluate 21 popular LLMs based on MT-Bench-101, conducting comprehensive analyses from both ability and task perspectives and observing differing trends in LLMs performance across dialogue turns within various tasks. Further analysis indicates that neither utilizing common alignment techniques nor chat-specific designs has led to obvious enhancements in the multi-turn abilities of LLMs. Extensive case studies suggest that our designed tasks accurately assess the corresponding multi-turn abilities. The data and code are available at https://github.com/mtbench101/mt-bench-101.

Large language models (LLMs) undergo safety alignment to ensure safe conversations with humans. However, this paper introduces a training-free attack method capable of reversing safety alignment, converting the outcomes of stronger alignment into greater potential for harm by accessing only LLM output token distributions. Specifically, our method achieves this reversal by contrasting the output token distribution of a safety-aligned language model (e.g., Llama-2-chat) against its pre-trained version (e.g., Llama-2), so that the token predictions are shifted towards the opposite direction of safety alignment.We name this method emulated disalignment (ED) because sampling from this contrastive distribution provably emulates the result of fine-tuning to minimize a safety reward.Our experiments with ED across three evaluation datasets and four model families (Llama-1, Llama-2, Mistral, and Alpaca) show that ED doubles the harmfulness of pre-trained models and outperforms strong baselines, achieving the highest harmful rates in 43 out of 48 evaluation subsets by a large margin.Eventually, given ED’s reliance on language model output token distributions, which particularly compromises open-source models, our findings highlight the need to reassess the open accessibility of language models, even if they have been safety-aligned.Code is available at https://github.com/ZHZisZZ/emulated-disalignment.