Prior Constraints-based Reward Model Training for Aligning Large Language Models
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.00978v2
- Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 05:28:12 GMT
- Title: Prior Constraints-based Reward Model Training for Aligning Large Language Models
- Authors: Hang Zhou, Chenglong Wang, Yimin Hu, Tong Xiao, Chunliang Zhang, Jingbo Zhu,
- Abstract summary: This paper proposes a Prior Constraints-based Reward Model (namely PCRM) training method to mitigate this problem.
PCRM incorporates prior constraints, specifically, length ratio and cosine similarity between outputs of each comparison pair, during reward model training to regulate optimization magnitude and control score margins.
Experimental results demonstrate that PCRM significantly improves alignment performance by effectively constraining reward score scaling.
- Score: 58.33118716810208
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Reinforcement learning with human feedback for aligning large language models (LLMs) trains a reward model typically using ranking loss with comparison pairs.However, the training procedure suffers from an inherent problem: the uncontrolled scaling of reward scores during reinforcement learning due to the lack of constraints while training the reward model.This paper proposes a Prior Constraints-based Reward Model (namely PCRM) training method to mitigate this problem. PCRM incorporates prior constraints, specifically, length ratio and cosine similarity between outputs of each comparison pair, during reward model training to regulate optimization magnitude and control score margins. We comprehensively evaluate PCRM by examining its rank correlation with human preferences and its effectiveness in aligning LLMs via RL. Experimental results demonstrate that PCRM significantly improves alignment performance by effectively constraining reward score scaling. As another bonus, our method is easily integrated into arbitrary rank-based alignment methods, such as direct preference optimization, and can yield consistent improvement.
Related papers
- Self-supervised Preference Optimization: Enhance Your Language Model with Preference Degree Awareness [27.43137305486112]
We propose a novel Self-supervised Preference Optimization (SPO) framework, which constructs a self-supervised preference degree loss combined with the alignment loss.
The results demonstrate that SPO can be seamlessly integrated with existing preference optimization methods to achieve state-of-the-art performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-26T12:37:26Z) - Post-hoc Reward Calibration: A Case Study on Length Bias [28.266675778940133]
Reward models (RMs) can develop biases by exploiting spurious correlations in their training data.
These biases can lead to incorrect output rankings, sub-optimal model evaluations, and the amplification of undesirable behaviours.
This paper addresses the challenge of correcting such biases without additional data and training.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-25T22:30:42Z) - Joint Demonstration and Preference Learning Improves Policy Alignment with Human Feedback [58.049113055986375]
We develop a single stage approach named Alignment with Integrated Human Feedback (AIHF) to train reward models and the policy.
The proposed approach admits a suite of efficient algorithms, which can easily reduce to, and leverage, popular alignment algorithms.
We demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed solutions with extensive experiments involving alignment problems in LLMs and robotic control problems in MuJoCo.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-11T01:20:53Z) - Provably Mitigating Overoptimization in RLHF: Your SFT Loss is Implicitly an Adversarial Regularizer [52.09480867526656]
We identify the source of misalignment as a form of distributional shift and uncertainty in learning human preferences.
To mitigate overoptimization, we first propose a theoretical algorithm that chooses the best policy for an adversarially chosen reward model.
Using the equivalence between reward models and the corresponding optimal policy, the algorithm features a simple objective that combines a preference optimization loss and a supervised learning loss.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-26T05:38:50Z) - WARM: On the Benefits of Weight Averaged Reward Models [63.08179139233774]
We propose Weight Averaged Reward Models (WARM) to mitigate reward hacking.
Experiments on summarization tasks, using best-of-N and RL methods, shows that WARM improves the overall quality and alignment of LLM predictions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-22T18:27:08Z) - Directly Attention Loss Adjusted Prioritized Experience Replay [0.07366405857677226]
Prioritized Replay Experience (PER) enables the model to learn more about relatively important samples by artificially changing their accessed frequencies.
DALAP is proposed, which can directly quantify the changed extent of the shifted distribution through Parallel Self-Attention network.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-24T10:14:05Z) - SALMON: Self-Alignment with Instructable Reward Models [80.83323636730341]
This paper presents a novel approach, namely SALMON, to align base language models with minimal human supervision.
We develop an AI assistant named Dromedary-2 with only 6 exemplars for in-context learning and 31 human-defined principles.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-09T17:56:53Z) - Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model [119.65409513119963]
We introduce a new parameterization of the reward model in RLHF that enables extraction of the corresponding optimal policy in closed form.
The resulting algorithm, which we call Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), is stable, performant, and computationally lightweight.
Our experiments show that DPO can fine-tune LMs to align with human preferences as well as or better than existing methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-29T17:57:46Z)
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.