Societal Impacts

Red Teaming Language Models to Reduce Harms: Methods, Scaling Behaviors, and Lessons Learned

Read Paper
Red Teaming Language Models to Reduce Harms: Methods, Scaling Behaviors, and Lessons Learned

Abstract

We describe our early efforts to red team language models in order to simultaneously discover, measure, and attempt to reduce their potentially harmful outputs. We make three main contributions. First, we investigate scaling behaviors for red teaming across 3 model sizes (2.7B, 13B, and 52B parameters) and 4 model types: a plain language model (LM); an LM prompted to be helpful, honest, and harmless; an LM with rejection sampling; and a model trained to be helpful and harmless using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). We find that the RLHF models are increasingly difficult to red team as they scale, and we find a flat trend with scale for the other model types. Second, we release our dataset of 38,961 red team attacks for others to analyze and learn from. We provide our own analysis of the data and find a variety of harmful outputs, which range from offensive language to more subtly harmful non-violent unethical outputs. Third, we exhaustively describe our instructions, processes, statistical methodologies, and uncertainty about red teaming. We hope that this transparency accelerates our ability to work together as a community in order to develop shared norms, practices, and technical standards for how to red team language models.

Policy Memo

Red Teaming Policy Memo

Related content

Claude-shaped science

Guest author Prof. Matthew Schwartz describes what happened when he stopped fighting Claude and allowed Claude to find “Claude-shaped” problems: ones best suited to the capabilities of the current generation of LLM tools. This led him to build BootLoops, a toolkit for exact calculations in quantitative science, which he has been applying across scientific fields alongside experts.

Read more

What work can robots do?

We built an index of how well today’s robots can perform US job tasks. Robots can already do three-quarters of physical tasks, mostly in limited settings, but are cost-competitive for just 0.3% of them.

Read more

What do you want from AI?

We’re launching a new study using Anthropic Interviewer to learn from your experiences with AI, and we invite you to participate.

Read more