Comparing Bad Apples to Good Oranges: Aligning Large Language Models via Joint Preference Optimization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.00530v1
• Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 02:05:40 GMT
• Title: Comparing Bad Apples to Good Oranges: Aligning Large Language Models via Joint Preference Optimization
• Authors: Hritik Bansal, Ashima Suvarna, Gantavya Bhatt, Nanyun Peng, Kai-Wei Chang, Aditya Grover,
• Abstract summary: A common technique for aligning large language models (LLMs) relies on acquiring human preferences. We propose a new axis that is based on eliciting preferences jointly over the instruction-response pairs. We find that joint preferences over instruction and response pairs can significantly enhance the alignment of LLMs.
• Score: 105.3612692153615
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: A common technique for aligning large language models (LLMs) relies on acquiring human preferences by comparing multiple generations conditioned on a fixed context. This only leverages the pairwise comparisons when the generations are placed in an identical context. However, such conditional rankings often fail to capture the complex and multidimensional aspects of human preferences. In this work, we revisit the traditional paradigm of preference acquisition and propose a new axis that is based on eliciting preferences jointly over the instruction-response pairs. While prior preference optimizations are designed for conditional ranking protocols (e.g., DPO), our proposed preference acquisition protocol introduces DOVE, a new preference optimization objective that upweights the joint probability of the chosen instruction-response pair over the rejected instruction-response pair. Interestingly, we find that the LLM trained with joint instruction-response preference data using DOVE outperforms the LLM trained with DPO by 5.2% and 3.3% win-rate for the summarization and open-ended dialogue datasets, respectively. Our findings reveal that joint preferences over instruction and response pairs can significantly enhance the alignment of LLMs by tapping into a broader spectrum of human preference elicitation. The data and code is available at https://github.com/Hritikbansal/dove.

Related papers

• VPO: Leveraging the Number of Votes in Preference Optimization [5.200545764106177]
  We introduce a technique that leverages user voting data to better align with diverse subjective preferences. We develop the Vote-based Preference Optimization framework, which incorporates the number of votes on both sides to distinguish between controversial and obvious generation pairs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T10:39:34Z)
• Ordinal Preference Optimization: Aligning Human Preferences via NDCG [28.745322441961438]
  We develop an end-to-end preference optimization algorithm by approxing NDCG with a differentiable surrogate loss. OPO outperforms existing pairwise and listwise approaches on evaluation sets and general benchmarks like AlpacaEval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-06T03:49:28Z)
• General Preference Modeling with Preference Representations for Aligning Language Models [51.14207112118503]
  We introduce preference representation learning, an approach that embeds responses into a latent space to capture intricate preference structures efficiently. We also propose preference score-based General Preference Optimization (GPO), which generalizes reward-based reinforcement learning from human feedback. Our method may enhance the alignment of foundation models with nuanced human values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T04:22:55Z)
• Bridging and Modeling Correlations in Pairwise Data for Direct Preference Optimization [75.1240295759264]
  We propose an effective framework for Bridging and Modeling Correlations in pairwise data, named BMC. We increase the consistency and informativeness of the pairwise preference signals through targeted modifications. We identify that DPO alone is insufficient to model these correlations and capture nuanced variations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-14T11:29:47Z)
• Aligning Large Language Models with Self-generated Preference Data [72.99676237703099]
  We propose a new framework that boosts the alignment of large language models (LLMs) with human preferences. Our key idea is leveraging the human prior knowledge within the small (seed) data. We introduce a noise-aware preference learning algorithm to mitigate the risk of low quality within generated preference data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T18:01:02Z)
• Adaptive Preference Scaling for Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback [103.36048042664768]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is a prevalent approach to align AI systems with human values. We propose a novel adaptive preference loss, underpinned by distributionally robust optimization (DRO) Our method is versatile and can be readily adapted to various preference optimization frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-04T20:33:22Z)
• Direct Large Language Model Alignment Through Self-Rewarding Contrastive Prompt Distillation [45.21355506181213]
  We propose a method to evaluate the response preference by using the output probabilities of response pairs under contrastive prompt pairs. Based on this, we propose an automatic alignment method, Direct Large Model Alignment (DLMA) In the experimental stage, our DLMA method could surpass the textttRLHF method without relying on human-annotated preference data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T07:46:40Z)
• Relative Preference Optimization: Enhancing LLM Alignment through Contrasting Responses across Identical and Diverse Prompts [95.09994361995389]
  Relative Preference Optimization (RPO) is designed to discern between more and less preferred responses derived from both identical and related prompts. RPO has demonstrated a superior ability to align large language models with user preferences and to improve their adaptability during the training process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T22:47:57Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.