Michael Yu
Publications
To Memorize or to Retrieve: Scaling the Interaction Between Pretraining and Retrieval
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) improves language model (LM) performance by providing relevant context at test time for knowledge-intensive situations. In this work, we systematically study the trade-off between pretraining and retrieval by training OLMo-2-based LMs ranging from 30M to 3B parameters on up to 100B DCLM tokens, while varying pretraining data scale, retrieval store size, and retrieval store source (pretraining vs. new data) across reasoning, scientific QA, and open-domain QA benchmarks. We find that retrieval gains depend on model capacity and pretraining exposure and are strongly front-loaded, with a median 91% of the largest observed improvement realized by one retrieval token per model parameter. However, the interaction is objective-dependent: smaller models gain more in gold-answer perplexity, whereas larger, more-pretrained models gain more in accuracy. Retrieval from previously seen data also preserves most of the held-out retrieval gain. Retrieval is therefore a task-, regime-, and metric-dependent complement to parametric learning whose value also depends on datastore size and information novelty. Overall, this motivates the explicit partitioning of data between internalization and external access for LM design.
Data-Centric Interpretability for LLM-based Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly trained in complex Reinforcement Learning, multi-agent environments, making it difficult to understand how behavior changes over training. Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) have recently shown to be useful for data-centric interpretability. In this work, we analyze large-scale reinforcement learning training runs from the sophisticated environment of Full-Press Diplomacy by applying pretrained SAEs, alongside LLM-summarizer methods. We introduce Meta-Autointerp, a method for grouping SAE features into interpretable hypotheses about training dynamics. We discover fine-grained behaviors including role-playing patterns, degenerate outputs, language switching, alongside high-level strategic behaviors and environment-specific bugs. Through automated evaluation, we validate that 90% of discovered SAE Meta-Features are significant, and find a surprising reward hacking behavior. However, through two user studies, we find that even subjectively interesting and seemingly helpful SAE features may be worse than useless to humans, along with most LLM generated hypotheses. However, a subset of SAE-derived hypotheses are predictively useful for downstream tasks. We further provide validation by augmenting an untrained agent's system prompt, improving the score by +14.2%. Overall, we show that SAEs and LLM-summarizer provide complementary views into agent behavior, and together our framework forms a practical starting point for future data-centric interpretability work on ensuring trustworthy LLM behavior throughout training.