Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Easy-to-Hard Generalization: Scalable Alignment Beyond Human Supervision

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

arxiv 2403.09472 v2 pith:SEYSV7GL submitted 2024-03-14 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.CL
keywords easy-to-hardhumanproblemstasksgeneralizationalignmentcapabilitieslevel
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Current AI alignment methodologies rely on human-provided demonstrations or judgments, and the learned capabilities of AI systems would be upper-bounded by human capabilities as a result. This raises a challenging research question: How can we keep improving the systems when their capabilities have surpassed the levels of humans? This paper answers this question in the context of tackling hard reasoning tasks (e.g., level 4-5 MATH problems) via learning from human annotations on easier tasks (e.g., level 1-3 MATH problems), which we term as easy-to-hard generalization. Our key insight is that an evaluator (reward model) trained on supervisions for easier tasks can be effectively used for scoring candidate solutions of harder tasks and hence facilitating easy-to-hard generalization over different levels of tasks. Based on this insight, we propose a novel approach to scalable alignment, which firstly trains the (process-supervised) reward models on easy problems (e.g., level 1-3), and then uses them to evaluate the performance of policy models on hard problems. We show that such easy-to-hard generalization from evaluators can enable easy-to-hard generalizations in generators either through re-ranking or reinforcement learning (RL). Notably, our process-supervised 7b RL model and 34b model (reranking@1024) achieves an accuracy of 34.0% and 52.5% on MATH500, respectively, despite only using human supervision on easy problems. Our approach suggests a promising path toward AI systems that advance beyond the frontier of human supervision.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Error Typing for Smarter Rewards: Improving Process Reward Models with Error-Aware Hierarchical Supervision

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A hierarchical process reward model that classifies math and consistency errors before scoring steps achieves the best PRMBench result among discriminative PRMs and improves reward-guided math search.

Pith tools