Iterative Nash Policy Optimization: Aligning LLMs with General Preferences via No-Regret Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00617v3
• Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2024 04:07:39 GMT
• Title: Iterative Nash Policy Optimization: Aligning LLMs with General Preferences via No-Regret Learning
• Authors: Yuheng Zhang, Dian Yu, Baolin Peng, Linfeng Song, Ye Tian, Mingyue Huo, Nan Jiang, Haitao Mi, Dong Yu,
• Abstract summary: We propose a novel online algorithm, iterative Nash policy optimization (INPO) Unlike previous methods, INPO bypasses the need for estimating the expected win rate for individual responses. With an LLaMA-3-8B-based SFT model, INPO achieves a 42.6% length-controlled win rate on AlpacaEval 2.0 and a 37.8% win rate on Arena-Hard.
• Score: 55.65738319966385
• License:
• Abstract: Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) has achieved great success in aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences. Prevalent RLHF approaches are reward-based, following the Bradley-Terry (BT) model assumption, which may not fully capture the complexity of human preferences. In this paper, we explore RLHF under a general preference framework and approach it from a game-theoretic perspective. Specifically, we formulate the problem as a two-player game and propose a novel online algorithm, iterative Nash policy optimization (INPO). The key idea is to let the policy play against itself via no-regret learning, thereby approximating the Nash policy. Unlike previous methods, INPO bypasses the need for estimating the expected win rate for individual responses, which typically incurs high computational or annotation costs. Instead, we introduce a new loss objective that is directly minimized over a preference dataset. We provide theoretical analysis for our approach and demonstrate its effectiveness through experiments on various representative benchmarks. With an LLaMA-3-8B-based SFT model, INPO achieves a 42.6% length-controlled win rate on AlpacaEval 2.0 and a 37.8% win rate on Arena-Hard, showing substantial improvement over the state-of-the-art online RLHF algorithms.

Related papers

• PILAF: Optimal Human Preference Sampling for Reward Modeling [14.336058926701432]
  We propose Policy-Interpolated Learning for Aligned Feedback (PILAF), a novel response sampling strategy for preference labeling. PILAF explicitly aligns preference learning with maximizing the underlying oracle reward.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-06T18:09:00Z)
• Online Preference Alignment for Language Models via Count-based Exploration [46.46627519343809]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has shown great potential in fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) to align with human preferences. Existing methods perform preference alignment from a fixed dataset, which can be limited in data coverage. Online RLHF is more desirable to empower the LLM to explore outside the support of the initial dataset by iteratively collecting the prompt-response pairs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-22T09:12:09Z)
• Self-Play Preference Optimization for Language Model Alignment [75.83359213697854]
  Recent advancements suggest that directly working with preference probabilities can yield a more accurate reflection of human preferences. We propose a self-play-based method for language model alignment, which treats the problem as a constant-sum two-player game. Our approach, dubbed Self-Play Preference Optimization (SPPO), utilizes iterative policy updates to provably approximate the Nash equilibrium.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T17:59:20Z)
• Direct Nash Optimization: Teaching Language Models to Self-Improve with General Preferences [21.5605000515622]
  This paper studies post-training large language models (LLMs) using preference feedback from an oracle to help a model iteratively improve over itself. We introduce Direct Nash Optimization (DNO), a provable and efficient algorithm that marries the simplicity and stability of contrastive learning with theoretical generality from optimizing general preferences. In our experiments, a resulting 7B parameter Orca-2.5 model achieves the state-of-the-art win-rate against GPT-4-Turbo of 33% on AlpacaE 2.0 (even after controlling for response length), an absolute gain of 26% (7% to 33%) over the initializing model
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T17:56:41Z)
• Fine-Tuning Language Models with Reward Learning on Policy [68.70065254564642]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has emerged as an effective approach to aligning large language models (LLMs) to human preferences. Despite its popularity, (fixed) reward models may suffer from inaccurate off-distribution. We propose reward learning on policy (RLP), an unsupervised framework that refines a reward model using policy samples to keep it on-distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-28T10:02:10Z)
• MaxMin-RLHF: Alignment with Diverse Human Preferences [101.57443597426374]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) aligns language models to human preferences by employing a singular reward model derived from preference data. We learn a mixture of preference distributions via an expectation-maximization algorithm to better represent diverse human preferences. Our algorithm achieves an average improvement of more than 16% in win-rates over conventional RLHF algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T03:56:27Z)
• Nash Learning from Human Feedback [86.09617990412941]
  We introduce an alternative pipeline for the fine-tuning of large language models using pairwise human feedback. We term this approach Nash learning from human feedback (NLHF) We present a novel algorithmic solution, Nash-MD, founded on the principles of mirror descent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-01T19:26:23Z)
• Contrastive Preference Learning: Learning from Human Feedback without RL [71.77024922527642]
  We introduce Contrastive Preference Learning (CPL), an algorithm for learning optimal policies from preferences without learning reward functions. CPL is fully off-policy, uses only a simple contrastive objective, and can be applied to arbitrary MDPs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T16:37:56Z)

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.