Human vs. AI in Reinforcement Learning through Human Feedback


Reinforcement Learning through Human Feedback (RLHF) is a dynamic field that seeks to harness the wisdom of both human expertise and artificial intelligence to enhance the training of reinforcement learning agents. In this article, we delve into the pivotal role of humans in this process, emphasizing the unique contributions they bring to the table. Simultaneously, we explore the transformative potential of replacing human feedback with AI-driven feedback in RLHF. 

Humans are an irreplaceable asset in the RLHF landscape, offering a multifaceted approach to agent training. Their involvement spans from providing domain expertise to defining reward functions, ensuring ethical considerations, and adapting feedback as the agent evolves. This human touch adds nuance and context to RL training, making it adaptable to complex, real-world scenarios. However, integrating human feedback into RLHF is not without its challenges. The process can be resource-intensive and susceptible to biases. To address these issues, a new approach is emerging - one that explores the possibility of using AI to replace humans in RLHF. This paradigm shift, referred to as Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF), holds immense promise.

In the subsequent sections, we outline the key steps involved in implementing RLAIF, automation, and best practices. We explore how AI-generated feedback can streamline the RL training process, offering scalability, rapid feedback loops, and potential cost savings.

However, this transition to AI-driven feedback also raises crucial considerations. The quality of AI-generated feedback hinges on the capabilities and accuracy of the AI system, potentially introducing biases or limitations. Ethical concerns must be carefully managed, and the challenge of capturing the full spectrum of human judgment persists. To shed light on the practical implications of this transition, we refer to a recent paper from Google Research comparing RLHF with RLAIF. The study suggests that in certain tasks, AI-generated feedback can yield results comparable to human feedback. However, the suitability of AI feedback depends on the nature of the task, the domain, and the quality of the AI system.

As RLHF continues to evolve, the synergy between human judgment and AI capabilities will play a pivotal role in advancing the field, driving performance improvements in diverse applications.

Human in the Reinforcement Learning through Human Feedback (RLHF)

The reason to have a human in the Reinforcement Learning through Human Feedback (RLHF) process is to provide a source of expert knowledge and feedback that can guide the training of reinforcement learning (RL) agents. Humans play several crucial roles in this process:

While humans are valuable for providing feedback in RLHF, it's also important to note that incorporating human feedback can be challenging and expensive, as it may require human annotators or experts to continuously assess and rate the agent's performance. Additionally, there can be biases in human feedback, and ensuring a diverse set of perspectives is important.

The main idea behind RLHF is to leverage human expertise and judgment to accelerate and improve the RL training process, especially in situations where it's difficult to hand-design a reward function or where the agent needs to adapt to a dynamic and complex environment.

Using AI to replace humans in  RLHF

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) with AI-driven feedback is a practical approach that leverages artificial intelligence to accelerate and enhance the training of reinforcement learning (RL) agents. The following steps outline how this can be achieved, incorporating Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT-3.5, automation, compute resources, and best practices:

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI-driven feedback to train RL agents can be an effectively option. It involves collecting expert data, fine-tuning LLMs, automating the feedback loop, ensuring adequate compute resources, and following best practices to achieve desired outcomes in RL tasks. This approach harnesses the power of AI to provide scalable and continuous feedback to RL agents, ultimately leading to improved performance in various applications.

Impact on the RL training process by replacing humans with AI in  RLHF  

If you replace humans with AI for feedback in the context of Reinforcement Learning through Human Feedback (RLHF), you essentially transition from RLHF to a different paradigm often referred to as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback.

Here's how this change would impact the RL training process:


The recent paper (RLAIF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback) from Google Research compared RLHF with RL from AI Feedback (RLAIF), where they found that using an off-the-shelf LLM in lieu of humans to realize RLAIF resulted in similar improvements. It is worth noting that the task in question was text summarization. The paper points out that when humans were asked to rate RLAIF vs. RLHF summaries, they preferred both equally. It is worth noting that summarization of text generally is an easier task that may not involve deep critical thinking and common sense reasoning.  

Replacing human feedback with AI feedback in RLHF can have advantages in terms of scalability and automation but also introduces challenges related to bias, quality, and capturing the full range of human judgment. The choice between using human or AI feedback should depend on the specific requirements of the RL training task and the capabilities of the AI feedback system. In practice, a combination of both human and AI feedback may also be used to strike a balance between human expertise and scalability. 

My recommendation will be three-fold. 

First, be an optimist pessimist when making such choices, AI vs humans.  

Second, build, deploy, test and benchmark iteratively. 

Third, do not base your decision on a single scientific research publication as we have seen recently where the president of Stanford University, Marc Tessier-Lavigne, resigned in July 2023 after an investigation opened by the board of trustees found several academic reports he authored contained doctored data. Details can be found in the Scientific Panel Final Report, Stanford Board of Trustees dated Jul 17, 2023

Further read