Dr. SoW: Density Ratio of Strong-over-weak LLMs for Reducing the Cost of Human Annotation in Preference Tuning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.02481v3
• Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 21:15:53 GMT
• Title: Dr. SoW: Density Ratio of Strong-over-weak LLMs for Reducing the Cost of Human Annotation in Preference Tuning
• Authors: Guangxuan Xu, Kai Xu, Shivchander Sudalairaj, Hao Wang, Akash Srivastava,
• Abstract summary: We introduce Dr.SoW (Density Ratio of Strong over Weak) a cost-effective method that eliminates the reliance for human annotation. Dr.SoW uses the log-density ratio between a better-aligned and a less-aligned LLM as a reward signal. We preference-tune Llama-3-8B-Instruct using data annotated by Dr.SoW.
• Score: 15.776175440446414
• License:
• Abstract: Preference tuning relies on high-quality human preference data, which is often expensive and time-consuming to gather. In this paper, we introduce Dr.SoW (Density Ratio of Strong over Weak) a cost-effective method that eliminates the reliance for human annotation by leveraging off-the-shelf LLMs for preference data annotation. Dr.SoW uses the log-density ratio between a better-aligned and a less-aligned LLM as a reward signal. We evaluate Dr.SoW across 221 different LLM pairs and empirically find a strong correlation between the performance gap of the paired models and the quality of the reward signal. This insight provides a practical guideline for selecting LLMs for data annotation. Additionally, we introduce an end-to-end pipeline that customizes reward functions based on user query domains. Without fine-tuning, it improves accuracy on domain-specific evaluations. With a pair of Mistral-7B models, Dr.SoW achieves a RewardBench score of 82.6, outperforming the best trained reward functions from same model class and demonstrating competitive performance against SoTA models in Safety (91.0) and Reasoning (88.0) domains. Further, we preference-tune Llama-3-8B-Instruct using data annotated by Dr.SoW. Our approach pushes Llama-3-8B to achieve a 37.4 % (+15.1 %) win rate on ArenaHard and a 40.7 % (+17.8 %) win rate on length-controlled AlpacaEval 2.0.

Related papers

• R.I.P.: Better Models by Survival of the Fittest Prompts [51.2293437372642]
  We introduce a method for evaluating data integrity based on the assumption that low-quality input prompts result in high variance and low quality responses. This is achieved by measuring the rejected response quality and the reward gap between the chosen and rejected preference pair.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T18:50:25Z)
• 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)
• Anchored Preference Optimization and Contrastive Revisions: Addressing Underspecification in Alignment [57.03947082589616]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are often aligned using contrastive alignment objectives and preference pair datasets. We study this and find that preference data gives a better learning signal when the underlying responses are contrastive. We introduce Contrastive Learning from AI Revisions (CLAIR), a data-creation method which leads to more contrastive preference pairs. Our best model, trained on 32K CLAIR preferences with APO, improves Llama-3-8B-Instruct by 7.65%, closing the gap with GPT4-turbo by 45%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-12T16:24:51Z)
• Foundational Autoraters: Taming Large Language Models for Better Automatic Evaluation [20.41379322900742]
  We introduce FLAMe, a family of Foundational Large Autorater Models. FLAMe is trained on our large and diverse collection of 100+ quality assessment tasks. We show that FLAMe can also serve as a powerful starting point for further downstream fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T15:33:45Z)
• Iterative Nash Policy Optimization: Aligning LLMs with General Preferences via No-Regret Learning [55.65738319966385]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-30T08:00:34Z)
• 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)
• Monte Carlo Tree Search Boosts Reasoning via Iterative Preference Learning [55.96599486604344]
  We introduce an approach aimed at enhancing the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) through an iterative preference learning process. We use Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to iteratively collect preference data, utilizing its look-ahead ability to break down instance-level rewards into more granular step-level signals. The proposed algorithm employs Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) to update the LLM policy using this newly generated step-level preference data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T11:10:24Z)
• Split and Merge: Aligning Position Biases in LLM-based Evaluators [22.265542509143756]
  PORTIA is an alignment-based system designed to mimic human comparison strategies to calibrate position bias. Our results show that PORTIA markedly enhances the consistency rates for all the models and comparison forms tested. It rectifies around 80% of the position bias instances within the GPT-4 model, elevating its consistency rate up to 98%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T14:38:58Z)
• RAIN: Your Language Models Can Align Themselves without Finetuning [25.703729145091483]
  Large language models (LLMs) often demonstrate inconsistencies with human preferences. We show that unaligned LLMs can directly produce responses consistent with human preferences via self-boosting. We introduce a novel inference method, Rewindable Auto-regressive INference (RAIN), that allows pre-trained LLMs to evaluate their own generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-13T17:59:09Z)

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.