Solving the Inverse Alignment Problem for Efficient RLHF

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.10529v1
• Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:47:38 GMT
• Title: Solving the Inverse Alignment Problem for Efficient RLHF
• Authors: Shambhavi Krishna, Aishwarya Sahoo,
• Abstract summary: We define the 'inverse alignment problem' in language model training. We investigate whether repeatedly fine-tuning a reward model on subsets of the offline preference dataset aligned with a periodically frozen policy improves upon vanilla RLHF.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: Collecting high-quality preference datasets for reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is resource-intensive and challenging. As a result, researchers often train reward models on extensive offline datasets which aggregate diverse generation sources and scoring/alignment policies. We hypothesize that this aggregation has an averaging effect on reward model scores, which limits signal and impairs the alignment process. Inspired by the field of inverse RL, we define the 'inverse alignment problem' in language model training, where our objective is to optimize the critic's reward for a fixed actor and a fixed offline preference dataset. We hypothesize that solving the inverse alignment problem will improve reward model quality by providing clearer feedback on the policy's current behavior. To that end, we investigate whether repeatedly fine-tuning a reward model on subsets of the offline preference dataset aligned with a periodically frozen policy during RLHF improves upon vanilla RLHF. Our empirical results demonstrate that this approach facilitates superior alignment and faster convergence compared to using an unaligned or out-of-distribution reward model relative to the LLM policy.

Related papers

• 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)
• In-Dataset Trajectory Return Regularization for Offline Preference-based Reinforcement Learning [15.369324784520538]
  We propose In-Dataset Trajectory Return Regularization (DTR) for offline preference-based reinforcement learning. DTR mitigates the risk of learning inaccurate trajectory stitching under reward bias. We also introduce an ensemble normalization technique that effectively integrates multiple reward models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T09:35:47Z)
• 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)
• SAIL: Self-Improving Efficient Online Alignment of Large Language Models [56.59644677997827]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback is a key method for aligning large language models with human preferences. Recent literature has focused on designing online RLHF methods but still lacks a unified conceptual formulation. Our approach significantly improves alignment performance on open-sourced datasets with minimal computational overhead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T18:05:35Z)
• Learning Reward and Policy Jointly from Demonstration and Preference Improves Alignment [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)
• 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)
• Uncertainty-Penalized Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with Diverse Reward LoRA Ensembles [26.955375398765085]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) emerges as a promising paradigm for aligning large language models (LLMs) In this paper, we observe the weakness of KL regularization which is commonly employed in existing RLHF methods to address overoptimization. We propose uncertainty-penalized RLHF (UP-RLHF), which incorporates uncertainty regularization during RL-finetuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-30T14:14:14Z)
• PARL: A Unified Framework for Policy Alignment in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback [106.63518036538163]
  We present a novel unified bilevel optimization-based framework, textsfPARL, formulated to address the recently highlighted critical issue of policy alignment in reinforcement learning. Our framework addressed these concerns by explicitly parameterizing the distribution of the upper alignment objective (reward design) by the lower optimal variable. Our empirical results substantiate that the proposed textsfPARL can address the alignment concerns in RL by showing significant improvements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-03T18:03:44Z)

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.