arXiv subjects

Jacob Morrison

Publications and source records attributed to Jacob Morrison.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Demystifying Reinforcement Learning Post-Training of Language Models

Reinforcement learning (RL) post-training has emerged as a powerful framework for enhancing the capabilities of large language models (LLMs), enabling impressive reasoning, math, and coding capabilities. Yet for many researchers and practitioners, the principles behind classical RL remain a "black box". In this work, we deconstruct the RL post-training algorithm, investigating each step to clarify what is actually happening beneath the surface. By isolating the mechanics of RL with Verifiable Rewards in a controlled and simplified environment, we examine how RL outcomes are shaped by the base model's prior distribution, the granularity of the reward signal, the diversity of the prompt distribution, and model scale. We use the entropy of the policy's output distribution as a lens to compare the distributions learned through pretraining, SFT, and RL post-training, revealing how each stage shapes model certainty. Our investigation sheds light on how these choices interact to affect post-training success. For example, we show that the effect of so-called 'spurious rewards' depends on the prompt distribution used for post-training. We also provide insight into why the success of RL post-training depends on whether the base model already places sufficient probability mass on the desired behavior, linking it to the classical concept of exploration in RL. Ultimately, we provide this primer as a resource to those in the NLP community wishing to incorporate RL as a tool in their toolbox.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

The Hidden Cost of Thinking: Energy Use and Environmental Impact of LMs Beyond Pretraining

Modern language model development extends far beyond pretraining, yet environmental reporting remains narrowly focused on the cost of training a single final model. In this work, we provide the first detailed breakdown of the environmental impact of a full model development pipeline, from pretraining through supervised fine-tuning, preference optimization, and reinforcement learning, for Olmo 3, a family of 7 billion and 32 billion parameter models in both instruction-following and reasoning variants. We find that reasoning models are 17x more expensive to post-train than their instruction-tuned counterparts in terms of datacenter energy, driven by reinforcement learning rollout generation. Development costs (including experimentation, failed runs, and ablations) account for 82.2% of total compute, a roughly 65% increase over the ~50% reported for pretraining-focused pipelines in prior work. In total, we estimate our model development process consumed ~12.3 GWh of datacenter energy, emitted 4,251 tCO2eq, and consumed 15,887 kL of water, with water consumption driven entirely by power generation infrastructure rather than data center cooling. These costs, which are almost entirely unreported by model developers, are growing rapidly as post-training pipelines become more complex, and must be accounted for in environmental reporting standards and by the research community working to reduce AI's environmental impact.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Train Separately, Merge Together: Modular Post-Training with Mixture-of-Experts

Extending a fully post-trained language model with new domain capabilities is fundamentally limited by monolithic training paradigms: retraining from scratch is expensive and scales poorly, while continued training often degrades existing capabilities. We present BAR (Branch-Adapt-Route), which trains independent domain experts, each through its own mid-training, supervised finetuning, and reinforcement learning pipeline, and composes them via a Mixture-of-Experts architecture with lightweight router training. Unlike retraining approaches that mix all domains and require full reprocessing for any update (with cost scaling quadratically), BAR enables updating individual experts independently with linear cost scaling and no degradation to existing domains. At the 7B scale, with experts for math, code, tool use, and safety, BAR achieves an overall score of 49.1 (averaged across 7 evaluation categories), matching or exceeding re-training baselines (47.8 without mid-training, 50.5 with). We further show that modular training provides a structural advantage: by isolating each domain, it avoids the catastrophic forgetting that occurs when late-stage RL degrades capabilities from earlier training stages, while significantly reducing the cost and complexity of updating or adding a domain. Together, these results suggest that decoupled, expert-based training is a scalable alternative to monolithic retraining for extending language models.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Olmo Hybrid: From Theory to Practice and Back

Recent work has demonstrated the potential of non-transformer language models, especially linear recurrent neural networks (RNNs) and hybrid models that mix recurrence and attention. Yet there is no consensus on whether the potential benefits of these new architectures justify the risk and effort of scaling them up. To address this, we provide evidence for the advantages of hybrid models over pure transformers on several fronts. First, theoretically, we show that hybrid models do not merely inherit the expressivity of transformers and linear RNNs, but can express tasks beyond both, such as code execution. Putting this theory to practice, we train Olmo Hybrid, a 7B-parameter model largely comparable to Olmo 3 7B but with the sliding window layers replaced by Gated DeltaNet layers. We show that Olmo Hybrid outperforms Olmo 3 across standard pretraining and mid-training evaluations, demonstrating the benefit of hybrid models in a controlled, large-scale setting. We find that the hybrid model scales significantly more efficiently than the transformer, explaining its higher performance. However, its unclear why greater expressivity on specific formal problems should result in better scaling or superior performance on downstream tasks unrelated to those problems. To explain this apparent gap, we return to theory and argue why increased expressivity should translate to better scaling efficiency, completing the loop. Overall, our results suggest that hybrid models mixing attention and recurrent layers are a powerful extension to the language modeling paradigm: not merely to reduce memory during inference, but as a fundamental way to obtain more expressive models that scale better during pretraining.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Olmo 3

We introduce Olmo 3, a family of state-of-the-art, fully-open language models at the 7B and 32B parameter scales. Olmo 3 model construction targets long-context reasoning, function calling, coding, instruction following, general chat, and knowledge recall. This release includes the entire model flow, i.e., the full lifecycle of the family of models, including every stage, checkpoint, data point, and dependency used to build it. Our flagship model, Olmo 3 Think 32B, is the strongest fully-open thinking model released to-date.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

OlmoEarth: Stable Latent Image Modeling for Multimodal Earth Observation

Earth observation data presents a unique challenge: it is spatial like images, sequential like video or text, and highly multimodal. We present OlmoEarth: a multimodal, spatio-temporal foundation model that employs a novel self-supervised learning formulation, masking strategy, and loss all designed for the Earth observation domain. OlmoEarth achieves state-of-the-art performance compared to 12 other foundation models across a variety of research benchmarks and real-world tasks from external partners. When evaluating embeddings OlmoEarth achieves the best performance on 15 out of 24 tasks, and with full fine-tuning it is the best on 19 of 29 tasks. We deploy OlmoEarth as the backbone of an end-to-end platform for data collection, labeling, training, and inference of Earth observation models. The OlmoEarth Platform puts frontier foundation models and powerful data management tools into the hands of non-profits and NGOs working to solve the world's biggest problems. OlmoEarth source code, training data, and pre-trained weights are available at $\href{https://github.com/allenai/olmoearth_pretrain}{\text{https://github.com/allenai/olmoearth_pretrain}}$.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

FlexOlmo: Open Language Models for Flexible Data Use

We introduce FlexOlmo, a new class of language models (LMs) that supports (1) distributed training without data sharing, where different model parameters are independently trained on closed datasets, and (2) data-flexible inference, where these parameters along with their associated data can be flexibly included or excluded from model inferences with no further training. FlexOlmo employs a mixture-of-experts (MoE) architecture where each expert is trained independently on closed datasets and later integrated through a new domain-informed routing without any joint training. FlexOlmo is trained on FlexMix, a corpus we curate comprising publicly available datasets alongside seven domain-specific sets, representing realistic approximations of closed sets. We evaluate models with up to 37 billion parameters (20 billion active) on 31 diverse downstream tasks. We show that a general expert trained on public data can be effectively combined with independently trained experts from other data owners, leading to an average 41% relative improvement while allowing users to opt out of certain data based on data licensing or permission requirements. Our approach also outperforms prior model merging methods by 10.1% on average and surpasses the standard MoE trained without data restrictions using the same training FLOPs. Altogether, this research presents a solution for both data owners and researchers in regulated industries with sensitive or protected data. FlexOlmo enables benefiting from closed data while respecting data owners' preferences by keeping their data local and supporting fine-grained control of data access during inference.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Intentionally Unintentional: GenAI Exceptionalism and the First Amendment

This paper challenges the assumption that courts should grant First Amendment protections to outputs from large generative AI models, such as GPT-4 and Gemini. We argue that because these models lack intentionality, their outputs do not constitute speech as understood in the context of established legal precedent, so there can be no speech to protect. Furthermore, if the model outputs are not speech, users cannot claim a First Amendment speech right to receive the outputs. We also argue that extending First Amendment rights to AI models would not serve the fundamental purposes of free speech, such as promoting a marketplace of ideas, facilitating self-governance, or fostering self-expression. In fact, granting First Amendment protections to AI models would be detrimental to society because it would hinder the government's ability to regulate these powerful technologies effectively, potentially leading to the unchecked spread of misinformation and other harms.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

RewardBench 2: Advancing Reward Model Evaluation

Reward models are used throughout the post-training of language models to capture nuanced signals from preference data and provide a training target for optimization across instruction following, reasoning, safety, and more domains. The community has begun establishing best practices for evaluating reward models, from the development of benchmarks that test capabilities in specific skill areas to others that test agreement with human preferences. At the same time, progress in evaluation has not been mirrored by the effectiveness of reward models in downstream tasks -- simpler direct alignment algorithms are reported to work better in many cases. This paper introduces RewardBench 2, a new multi-skill reward modeling benchmark designed to bring new, challenging data for accuracy-based reward model evaluation -- models score about 20 points on average lower on RewardBench 2 compared to the first RewardBench -- while being highly correlated with downstream performance. Compared to most other benchmarks, RewardBench 2 sources new human prompts instead of existing prompts from downstream evaluations, facilitating more rigorous evaluation practices. In this paper, we describe our benchmark construction process and report how existing models perform on it, while quantifying how performance on the benchmark correlates with downstream use of the models in both inference-time scaling algorithms, like best-of-N sampling, and RLHF training algorithms like proximal policy optimization.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Holistically Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Creating Language Models

As the performance of artificial intelligence systems has dramatically increased, so too has the environmental impact of creating these systems. While many model developers release estimates of the power consumption and carbon emissions from the final training runs for their latest models, there is comparatively little transparency into the impact of model development, hardware manufacturing, and total water usage throughout. In this work, we estimate the real-world environmental impact of developing a series of language models, ranging from 20 million to 13 billion active parameters, trained on up to 5.6 trillion tokens each. When accounting for hardware manufacturing, model development, and our final training runs, we find that our series of models released 493 metric tons of carbon emissions, equivalent to powering about 98 homes in the United States for one year, and consumed 2.769 million liters of water, equivalent to about 24.5 years of water usage by a person in the United States, even though our data center is extremely water-efficient. We measure and report the environmental impact of our model development; to the best of our knowledge we are the first to do so for LLMs, and we find that model development, the impact of which is generally not disclosed by most model developers, amounted to ~50% of that of training. By looking at detailed time series data for power consumption, we also find that power usage throughout training is not consistent, fluctuating between ~15% and ~85% of our hardware's maximum power draw, with negative implications for grid-scale planning as demand continues to grow. We close with a discussion on the continued difficulty of estimating the environmental impact of AI systems, and key takeaways for model developers and the public at large.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

2 OLMo 2 Furious

We present OLMo 2, the next generation of our fully open language models. OLMo 2 includes a family of dense autoregressive language models at 7B, 13B and 32B scales with fully released artifacts -- model weights, full training data, training code and recipes, training logs and thousands of intermediate checkpoints. In this work, we describe our modified model architecture and training recipe, focusing on techniques for achieving better training stability and improved per-token efficiency. Our updated pretraining data mixture introduces a new, specialized data mix called Dolmino Mix 1124, which significantly improves model capabilities across many downstream task benchmarks when introduced via late-stage curriculum training (i.e. specialized data during the annealing phase of pretraining). Finally, we incorporate best practices from T\"ulu 3 to develop OLMo 2-Instruct, focusing on permissive data and extending our final-stage reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR). Our OLMo 2 base models sit at the Pareto frontier of performance to training compute, often matching or outperforming open-weight only models like Llama 3.1, Qwen 2.5, and Gemma 2 while using fewer FLOPs and with fully transparent training data, code, and recipe. Our fully open OLMo 2-Instruct models are competitive with open-weight only models of comparable size and even some proprietary models like GPT-3.5 Turbo and GPT 4o Mini.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Training

Language model post-training is applied to refine behaviors and unlock new skills across a wide range of recent language models, but open recipes for applying these techniques lag behind proprietary ones. The underlying training data and recipes for post-training are simultaneously the most important pieces of the puzzle and the portion with the least transparency. To bridge this gap, we introduce Tulu 3, a family of fully-open state-of-the-art post-trained models, alongside its data, code, and training recipes, serving as a comprehensive guide for modern post-training techniques. Tulu 3, which builds on Llama 3.1 base models, achieves results surpassing the instruct versions of Llama 3.1, Qwen 2.5, Mistral, and even closed models such as GPT-4o-mini and Claude 3.5-Haiku. The training algorithms for our models include supervised finetuning (SFT), Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), and a novel method we call Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR). With Tulu 3, we introduce a multi-task evaluation scheme for post-training recipes with development and unseen evaluations, standard benchmark implementations, and substantial decontamination of existing open datasets on said benchmarks. We conclude with analysis and discussion of training methods that did not reliably improve performance. In addition to the Tulu 3 model weights and demo, we release the complete recipe -- including datasets for diverse core skills, a robust toolkit for data curation and evaluation, the training code and infrastructure, and, most importantly, a detailed report for reproducing and further adapting the Tulu 3 approach to more domains.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Merge to Learn: Efficiently Adding Skills to Language Models with Model Merging

Adapting general-purpose language models to new skills is currently an expensive process that must be repeated as new instruction datasets targeting new skills are created, or can cause the models to forget older skills. In this work, we investigate the effectiveness of adding new skills to preexisting models by training on the new skills in isolation and later merging with the general model (e.g. using task vectors). In experiments focusing on scientific literature understanding, safety, and coding, we find that the parallel-train-then-merge procedure, which is significantly cheaper than retraining the models on updated data mixtures, is often comparably effective. Our experiments also show that parallel training is especially well-suited for enabling safety features in LMs relative to continued finetuning and retraining, as it dramatically improves model compliance with safe prompts while preserving its ability to refuse dangerous or harmful prompts.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

OLMoE: Open Mixture-of-Experts Language Models

We introduce OLMoE, a fully open, state-of-the-art language model leveraging sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE). OLMoE-1B-7B has 7 billion (B) parameters but uses only 1B per input token. We pretrain it on 5 trillion tokens and further adapt it to create OLMoE-1B-7B-Instruct. Our models outperform all available models with similar active parameters, even surpassing larger ones like Llama2-13B-Chat and DeepSeekMoE-16B. We present various experiments on MoE training, analyze routing in our model showing high specialization, and open-source all aspects of our work: model weights, training data, code, and logs.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Unsettled Law: Time to Generate New Approaches?

We identify several important and unsettled legal questions with profound ethical and societal implications arising from generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), focusing on its distinguishable characteristics from traditional software and earlier AI models. Our key contribution is formally identifying the issues that are unique to GenAI so scholars, practitioners, and others can conduct more useful investigations and discussions. While established legal frameworks, many originating from the pre-digital era, are currently employed in GenAI litigation, we question their adequacy. We argue that GenAI's unique attributes, including its general-purpose nature, reliance on massive datasets, and potential for both pervasive societal benefits and harms, necessitate a re-evaluation of existing legal paradigms. We explore potential areas for legal and regulatory adaptation, highlighting key issues around copyright, privacy, torts, contract law, criminal law, property law, and the First Amendment. Through an exploration of these multifaceted legal challenges, we aim to stimulate discourse and policy considerations surrounding GenAI, emphasizing a proactive approach to legal and ethical frameworks. While we refrain from advocating specific legal changes, we underscore the need for policymakers to carefully consider the issues raised. We conclude by summarizing key questions across these areas of law in a helpful table for easy reference.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

SciRIFF: A Resource to Enhance Language Model Instruction-Following over Scientific Literature

We present SciRIFF (Scientific Resource for Instruction-Following and Finetuning), a dataset of 137K instruction-following instances for training and evaluation, covering 54 tasks. These tasks span five core scientific literature understanding capabilities: information extraction, summarization, question answering, claim verification, and classification. SciRIFF is unique in being entirely expert-written, high-quality instruction-following dataset for extracting and synthesizing information from research literature across diverse scientific fields. It features complex instructions with long input contexts, detailed task descriptions, and structured outputs. To demonstrate its utility, we finetune a series of large language models (LLMs) using a mix of general-domain and SciRIFF instructions. On nine out-of-distribution held-out tasks (referred to as SciRIFF-Eval), LLMs finetuned on SciRIFF achieve 70.6% average improvement over baselines trained only on general-domain instructions. SciRIFF facilitates the development and evaluation of LLMs to help researchers navigate the rapidly growing body of scientific literature.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

A Legal Risk Taxonomy for Generative Artificial Intelligence

For the first time, this paper presents a taxonomy of legal risks associated with generative AI (GenAI) by breaking down complex legal concepts to provide a common understanding of potential legal challenges for developing and deploying GenAI models. The methodology is based on (1) examining the legal claims that have been filed in existing lawsuits and (2) evaluating the reasonably foreseeable legal claims that may be filed in future lawsuits. First, we identified 29 lawsuits against prominent GenAI entities and tallied the claims of each lawsuit. From there, we identified seven claims that are cited at least four times across these lawsuits as the most likely claims for future GenAI lawsuits. For each of these seven claims, we describe the elements of the claim (what the plaintiff must prove to prevail) and provide an example of how it may apply to GenAI. Next, we identified 30 other potential claims that we consider to be more speculative, because they have been included in fewer than four lawsuits or have yet to be filed. We further separated those 30 claims into 19 that are most likely to be made in relation to pre-deployment of GenAI models and 11 that are more likely to be made in connection with post-deployment of GenAI models since the legal risks will vary between entities that create versus deploy them. For each of these claims, we describe the elements of the claim and the potential remedies that plaintiffs may seek to help entities determine their legal risks in developing or deploying GenAI. Lastly, we close the paper by noting the novelty of GenAI technology and propose some applications for the paper's taxonomy in driving further research.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modeling

Reward models (RMs) are at the crux of successfully using RLHF to align pretrained models to human preferences, yet there has been relatively little study that focuses on evaluation of those models. Evaluating reward models presents an opportunity to understand the opaque technologies used for alignment of language models and which values are embedded in them. Resources for reward model training and understanding are sparse in the nascent open-source community around them. To enhance scientific understanding of reward models, we present RewardBench, a benchmark dataset and code-base for evaluation. The RewardBench dataset is a collection of prompt-chosen-rejected trios spanning chat, reasoning, and safety, to benchmark how reward models perform on challenging, structured and out-of-distribution queries. We create specific comparison datasets for RMs that have subtle, but verifiable reasons (e.g. bugs, incorrect facts) why one answer should be preferred to another. On the RewardBench leaderboard, we evaluate reward models trained with a variety of methods, such as the direct MLE training of classifiers and the implicit reward modeling of Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). We present many findings on propensity for refusals, reasoning limitations, and instruction following shortcomings of various reward models towards a better understanding of the RLHF process.

cs.LG↗