SCAR: Shapley Credit Assignment for More Efficient RLHF

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.20417v1
• Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 18:06:52 GMT
• Title: SCAR: Shapley Credit Assignment for More Efficient RLHF
• Authors: Meng Cao, Shuyuan Zhang, Xiao-Wen Chang, Doina Precup,
• Abstract summary: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is a widely used technique for aligning Large Language Models with human preferences.<n>It often suffers from sparse reward signals, making effective credit assignment challenging.<n>We propose Shapley Credit Assignment Rewards (SCAR), a novel method that leverages Shapley values in cooperative game theory.
• Score: 57.09358918390916
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is a widely used technique for aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences, yet it often suffers from sparse reward signals, making effective credit assignment challenging. In typical setups, the reward model provides a single scalar score for an entire generated sequence, offering little insight into which token or span-level decisions were responsible for the outcome. To address this, we propose Shapley Credit Assignment Rewards (SCAR), a novel method that leverages Shapley values in cooperative game theory. SCAR distributes the total sequence-level reward among constituent tokens or text spans based on their principled marginal contributions. This creates dense reward signals, crucially, without necessitating the training of auxiliary critique models or recourse to fine-grained human annotations at intermediate generation stages. Unlike prior dense reward methods, SCAR offers a game-theoretic foundation for fair credit attribution. Theoretically, we demonstrate that SCAR preserves the original optimal policy, and empirically, across diverse tasks including sentiment control, text summarization, and instruction tuning, we show that SCAR converges significantly faster and achieves higher final reward scores compared to standard RLHF and attention-based dense reward baselines. Our findings suggest that SCAR provides a more effective and theoretically sound method for credit assignment in RLHF, leading to more efficient alignment of LLMs.

Related papers

• Segmenting Text and Learning Their Rewards for Improved RLHF in Language Model [96.20350225621813]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has been widely adopted to align language models (LMs) with human preference.<n>In this paper, we seek to get the best of both by training and utilizing a segment-level reward model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-06T06:17:56Z)
• T-REG: Preference Optimization with Token-Level Reward Regularization [35.07328450591201]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has been crucial in aligning large language models with human values.<n>Recent methods have attempted to address this limitation by introducing token-level rewards.<n>We propose token-level reward regularization (T-REG), a novel approach that leverages both sequence-level and token-level rewards for preference optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-03T18:56:07Z)
• R3HF: Reward Redistribution for Enhancing Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback [25.27230140274847]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) provides a paradigm for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences. This paper proposes a novel reward redistribution method called R3HF, which facilitates a more fine-grained, token-level reward allocation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-13T02:45:21Z)
• Optimal Design for Reward Modeling in RLHF [83.3614658277817]
  We formalize the reward training model in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback. We frame the selection of an effective dataset as a simple regret minimization task. We derive bounds on the simple regret under appropriate assumptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T14:36:44Z)
• Dense Reward for Free in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback [64.92448888346125]
  We leverage the fact that the reward model contains more information than just its scalar output. We use these attention weights to redistribute the reward along the whole completion. Empirically, we show that it stabilises training, accelerates the rate of learning, and, in practical cases, may lead to better local optima.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T17:10:35Z)
• Improving Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with Efficient Reward Model Ensemble [67.4269821365504]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is a widely adopted approach for aligning large language models with human values. However, RLHF relies on a reward model that is trained with a limited amount of human preference data. We contribute a reward ensemble method that allows the reward model to make more accurate predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-30T00:17:37Z)
• RLHFPoison: Reward Poisoning Attack for Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback in Large Language Models [62.72318564072706]
  Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) is a methodology designed to align Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences. Despite its advantages, RLHF relies on human annotators to rank the text. We propose RankPoison, a poisoning attack method on candidates' selection of preference rank flipping to reach certain malicious behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:48:45Z)
• RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback [5.3113139864044046]
  Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has proven effective in aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences, but gathering high-quality preference labels is expensive. RLAIF offers a promising alternative that trains the reward model (RM) on preferences generated by an off-the-shelf LLM. Our results suggest that RLAIF can achieve performance on-par with using human feedback, offering a potential solution to the scalability limitations of RLHF.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-01T05:53:33Z)

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.