Learning a Canonical Basis of Human Preferences from Binary Ratings

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.24150v1
• Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 14:35:48 GMT
• Title: Learning a Canonical Basis of Human Preferences from Binary Ratings
• Authors: Kailas Vodrahalli, Wei Wei, James Zou,
• Abstract summary: This paper shifts the focus to understanding the preferences encoded in such datasets and identifying common human preferences.<n>We find that a small subset of 21 preference categories captures >89% of preference variation across individuals.<n>This small set of preferences is analogous to a canonical basis of human preferences, similar to established findings that characterize human variation in psychology or facial recognition studies.
• Score: 28.975782992900065
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advances in generative AI have been driven by alignment techniques such as reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). RLHF and related techniques typically involve constructing a dataset of binary or ranked choice human preferences and subsequently fine-tuning models to align with these preferences. This paper shifts the focus to understanding the preferences encoded in such datasets and identifying common human preferences. We find that a small subset of 21 preference categories (selected from a set of nearly 5,000 distinct preferences) captures >89% of preference variation across individuals. This small set of preferences is analogous to a canonical basis of human preferences, similar to established findings that characterize human variation in psychology or facial recognition studies. Through both synthetic and empirical evaluations, we confirm that our low-rank, canonical set of human preferences generalizes across the entire dataset and within specific topics. We further demonstrate our preference basis' utility in model evaluation, where our preference categories offer deeper insights into model alignment, and in model training, where we show that fine-tuning on preference-defined subsets successfully aligns the model accordingly.

Related papers

• Influencing Humans to Conform to Preference Models for RLHF [41.929409024817936]
  A preference model that poorly describes how humans generate preferences risks learning a poor approximation of the human's reward function. We conduct three human studies to asses whether one can influence the expression of real human preferences to more closely conform to a desired preference model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-11T03:12:53Z)
• Hybrid Preferences: Learning to Route Instances for Human vs. AI Feedback [87.37721254914476]
  We introduce a routing framework that combines inputs from humans and LMs to achieve better annotation quality.<n>We train a performance prediction model to predict a reward model's performance on an arbitrary combination of human and LM annotations.<n>We show that the selected hybrid mixture achieves better reward model performance compared to using either one exclusively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T20:04:15Z)
• ComPO: Community Preferences for Language Model Personalization [122.54846260663922]
  ComPO is a method to personalize preference optimization in language models. We collect and release ComPRed, a question answering dataset with community-level preferences from Reddit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T14:02:40Z)
• LRHP: Learning Representations for Human Preferences via Preference Pairs [45.056558199304554]
  We introduce a preference representation learning task that aims to construct a richer and more structured representation of human preferences. We verify the utility of preference representations in two downstream tasks: preference data selection and preference margin prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-06T14:48:28Z)
• Beyond Bradley-Terry Models: A General Preference Model for Language Model Alignment [51.14207112118503]
  We introduce preference embedding, an approach that embeds responses into a latent space to capture preferences efficiently. We also propose preference score-based General Preference Optimization (GPO), which generalizes reward-based reinforcement learning from human feedback. Our method may enhance the alignment of foundation models with nuanced human values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T04:22:55Z)
• RLHF from Heterogeneous Feedback via Personalization and Preference Aggregation [24.374185140811115]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has been an effective technique for aligning AI systems with human values. In this paper, we focus on addressing the issues due to the inherent heterogeneity in human preferences, as well as their potential strategic behavior in providing feedback. We propose two frameworks to address heterogeneous human feedback in principled ways: personalization-based one and aggregation-based one.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-30T23:57:23Z)
• 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)
• On Diversified Preferences of Large Language Model Alignment [51.26149027399505]
  This paper presents the first quantitative analysis of the experimental scaling law for reward models with varying sizes. Our analysis reveals that the impact of diversified human preferences depends on both model size and data size. Larger models with sufficient capacity mitigate the negative effects of diverse preferences, while smaller models struggle to accommodate them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-12T16:17:15Z)
• Models of human preference for learning reward functions [80.39289349661364]
  We learn the reward function from human-generated preferences between pairs of trajectory segments. We find this assumption to be flawed and propose modeling human preferences as informed by each segment's regret. Our proposed regret preference model better predicts real human preferences and also learns reward functions from these preferences that lead to policies that are better human-aligned.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-05T17:58:02Z)

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.