Geometric-Averaged Preference Optimization for Soft Preference Labels

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.06691v2
• Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 05:02:12 GMT
• Title: Geometric-Averaged Preference Optimization for Soft Preference Labels
• Authors: Hiroki Furuta, Kuang-Huei Lee, Shixiang Shane Gu, Yutaka Matsuo, Aleksandra Faust, Heiga Zen, Izzeddin Gur,
• Abstract summary: Many algorithms for aligning LLMs with human preferences assume that human preferences are binary and deterministic. In this work, we introduce the distributional soft preference labels and improve Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) with a weighted geometric average of the LLM output likelihood in the loss function.
• Score: 78.2746007085333
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Many algorithms for aligning LLMs with human preferences assume that human preferences are binary and deterministic. However, human preferences can vary across individuals, and therefore should be represented distributionally. In this work, we introduce the distributional soft preference labels and improve Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) with a weighted geometric average of the LLM output likelihood in the loss function. This approach adjusts the scale of learning loss based on the soft labels such that the loss would approach zero when the responses are closer to equally preferred. This simple modification can be easily applied to any DPO-based methods and mitigate over-optimization and objective mismatch, which prior works suffer from. Our experiments simulate the soft preference labels with AI feedback from LLMs and demonstrate that geometric averaging consistently improves performance on standard benchmarks for alignment research. In particular, we observe more preferable responses than binary labels and significant improvements where modestly-confident labels are in the majority.

Related papers

• Reward-Augmented Data Enhances Direct Preference Alignment of LLMs [63.32585910975191]
  We introduce reward-conditioned Large Language Models (LLMs) that learn from the entire spectrum of response quality within the dataset. We propose an effective yet simple data relabeling method that conditions the preference pairs on quality scores to construct a reward-augmented dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T16:01:51Z)
• Minor DPO reject penalty to increase training robustness [8.971332948872185]
  Learning from human preference is a paradigm used in large-scale language model (LLM) fine-tuning step to better align pretrained LLM to human preference for downstream task. Recently, Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has been proposed to solve the alignment problem with a simplified RL-free method. In this article, we analyze the working mechanism of $beta$ in DPO, disclose its syntax difference between RL algorithm and DPO, and understand the potential shortage brought by the DPO simplification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-19T09:29:31Z)
• 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)
• Preference Learning Algorithms Do Not Learn Preference Rankings [62.335733662381884]
  We study the conventional wisdom that preference learning trains models to assign higher likelihoods to more preferred outputs than less preferred outputs. We find that most state-of-the-art preference-tuned models achieve a ranking accuracy of less than 60% on common preference datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T21:29:44Z)
• 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)
• $i$REPO: $i$mplicit Reward Pairwise Difference based Empirical Preference Optimization [12.266207199002604]
  Large Language Models (LLM) can sometimes produce outputs that deviate from human expectations. We propose a novel framework named $i$REPO, which utilizes implicit Reward pairwise difference regression for Empirical Preference Optimization. We show that $i$REPO effectively achieves self-alignment using soft-label, self-generated responses and the logit of empirical AI annotators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T05:42:11Z)

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.