Is Preference Alignment Always the Best Option to Enhance LLM-Based Translation? An Empirical Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.20059v1
• Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 08:01:44 GMT
• Title: Is Preference Alignment Always the Best Option to Enhance LLM-Based Translation? An Empirical Analysis
• Authors: Hippolyte Gisserot-Boukhlef, Ricardo Rei, Emmanuel Malherbe, Céline Hudelot, Pierre Colombo, Nuno M. Guerreiro,
• Abstract summary: This study focuses on Contrastive Preference Optimization (CPO) and conducts experiments to evaluate the impact of preference-based alignment on translation quality. Our findings indicate that while CPO consistently outperforms Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) on high-quality data with regard to the alignment metric, it may lead to instability across downstream evaluation metrics.
• Score: 20.023077870947024
• License: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
• Abstract: Neural metrics for machine translation (MT) evaluation have become increasingly prominent due to their superior correlation with human judgments compared to traditional lexical metrics. Researchers have therefore utilized neural metrics through quality-informed decoding strategies, achieving better results than likelihood-based methods. With the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs), preference-based alignment techniques have gained attention for their potential to enhance translation quality by optimizing model weights directly on preferences induced by quality estimators. This study focuses on Contrastive Preference Optimization (CPO) and conducts extensive experiments to evaluate the impact of preference-based alignment on translation quality. Our findings indicate that while CPO consistently outperforms Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) on high-quality data with regard to the alignment metric, it may lead to instability across downstream evaluation metrics, particularly between neural and lexical ones. Additionally, we demonstrate that relying solely on the base model for generating candidate translations achieves performance comparable to using multiple external systems, while ensuring better consistency across downstream metrics.

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)
• Preference Alignment Improves Language Model-Based TTS [76.70693823683091]
  preference alignment algorithms adjust LMs to align with the preferences of reward models, enhancing the desirability of the generated content. With a 1.15B parameter LM-based TTS model, we demonstrate that preference alignment consistently improves intelligibility, speaker similarity, and proxy subjective evaluation scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-19T01:58:19Z)
• A Gradient Analysis Framework for Rewarding Good and Penalizing Bad Examples in Language Models [63.949883238901414]
  We present a unique angle of gradient analysis of loss functions that simultaneously reward good examples and penalize bad ones in LMs. We find that ExMATE serves as a superior surrogate for MLE, and that combining DPO with ExMATE instead of MLE further enhances both the statistical (5-7%) and generative (+18% win rate) performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-29T17:46:18Z)
• Fairer Preferences Elicit Improved Human-Aligned Large Language Model Judgments [41.25558612970942]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) exhibit preference biases and worrying sensitivity to prompt designs. Motivated by this phenomenon, we propose an automatic Zero-shot Evaluation-oriented Prompt Optimization framework, ZEPO.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T09:48:53Z)
• On Softmax Direct Preference Optimization for Recommendation [50.896117978746]
  We propose Softmax-DPO (S-DPO) to instill ranking information into the LM to help LM-based recommenders distinguish preferred items from negatives. Specifically, we incorporate multiple negatives in user preference data and devise an alternative version of DPO loss tailored for LM-based recommenders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T15:16:11Z)
• 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)
• Aligning with Human Judgement: The Role of Pairwise Preference in Large Language Model Evaluators [48.54465599914978]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated promising capabilities in assessing the quality of generated natural language. LLMs still exhibit biases in evaluation and often struggle to generate coherent evaluations that align with human assessments. We introduce Pairwise-preference Search (PairS), an uncertainty-guided search method that employs LLMs to conduct pairwise comparisons and efficiently ranks candidate texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T17:11:28Z)
• Optimizing Language Models for Human Preferences is a Causal Inference Problem [41.59906798328058]
  We present an initial exploration of language model optimization for human preferences from direct outcome datasets. We first propose that language model optimization should be viewed as a causal problem to ensure that the model correctly learns the relationship between the text and the outcome. We extend CPO with doubly robust CPO, which reduces the variance of the surrogate objective while retaining provably strong guarantees on bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-22T21:36:07Z)
• Calibrating LLM-Based Evaluator [92.17397504834825]
  We propose AutoCalibrate, a multi-stage, gradient-free approach to calibrate and align an LLM-based evaluator toward human preference. Instead of explicitly modeling human preferences, we first implicitly encompass them within a set of human labels. Our experiments on multiple text quality evaluation datasets illustrate a significant improvement in correlation with expert evaluation through calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-23T08:46:11Z)

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.