Robust AI Evaluation through Maximal Lotteries

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21297v1
• Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 19:01:11 GMT
• Title: Robust AI Evaluation through Maximal Lotteries
• Abstract summary: We show that maximal lotteries can favor models that severely underperform on specific tasks or user subpopulations.<n>We introduce robust lotteries that optimize worst-case performance under plausible shifts in the preference data.<n>By moving from rankings to pluralistic sets of winners, robust lotteries offer a principled step toward an ecosystem of complementary AI systems.
• Score: 21.79691527817422
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The standard way to evaluate language models on subjective tasks is through pairwise comparisons: an annotator chooses the "better" of two responses to a prompt. Leaderboards aggregate these comparisons into a single Bradley-Terry (BT) ranking, forcing heterogeneous preferences into a total order and violating basic social-choice desiderata. In contrast, social choice theory provides an alternative approach called maximal lotteries, which aggregates pairwise preferences without imposing any assumptions on their structure. However, we show that maximal lotteries are highly sensitive to preference heterogeneity and can favor models that severely underperform on specific tasks or user subpopulations. We introduce robust lotteries that optimize worst-case performance under plausible shifts in the preference data. On large-scale preference datasets, robust lotteries provide more reliable win rate guarantees across the annotator distribution and recover a stable set of top-performing models. By moving from rankings to pluralistic sets of winners, robust lotteries offer a principled step toward an ecosystem of complementary AI systems that serve the full spectrum of human preferences.

Related papers

• Preference Data Selection for Mitigating the Alignment Tax in Large Language Models [52.18310687523229]
  BALIGN is a balanced data selection strategy that mitigates catastrophic forgetting while optimizing alignment efficacy.<n>By aggregating three key data-centric features into a unified composite risk score, BALIGN systematically filters out high-risk preference samples.<n>Experiments on standard human preference datasets demonstrate that BALIGN strongly preserves foundational capabilities without compromising alignment gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T07:58:42Z)
• Selective Ensemble Based on Preference-Directed Multi-Objective Bandits [90.75513823660775]
  We formalize a sequential decision problem under partially specified linear preferences.<n>We then propose a preference-directed upper confidence bound (PrefUCB) algorithm.<n> Experiments on large pre-trained model selective ensemble tasks and online asset allocation under institutional mandates validate our method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-20T07:52:46Z)
• Smooth Partial Lotteries for Stable Randomized Selection [61.86327960322782]
  Many organizations have adopted partial lotteries, which randomize selection based on evaluation scores.<n>Existing lottery designs are inherently unstable, as a small change to a single candidate's score can cause large shifts in selection probabilities.<n>We propose smoothness as a design principle for partial lotteries, formalizing it as a Lipschitz condition on the mapping from review scores over candidates to selection probabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-19T16:22:51Z)
• Variance-aware Reward Modeling with Anchor Guidance [10.561814492691534]
  We propose Anchor-guided Variance-aware Reward Modeling, a framework that resolves non-identifiability.<n>Across simulation studies and four real-world diverging-preference datasets, our method consistently improves reward modeling performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T09:46:26Z)
• Adaptive Pluralistic Alignment: A pipeline for dynamic artificial democracy [2.653040099621359]
  We introduce Adaptive Pluralistic Alignment (APA), a modular pipeline for updating pluralistically aligned AI systems to track evolving values.<n>APA has three stages: learning compact personalized reward models via low-rank reward basis decomposition, (2) using these models as a jury that collectively selects among candidate outputs through social-choice-theoretic voting, and (3) efficiently adapting the jury over time by fitting new annotator weights over the fixed reward bases as values shift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-02T23:22:23Z)
• Robust Preference Alignment via Directional Neighborhood Consensus [13.313830197011983]
  We introduce Robust Preference Selection (RPS), a post-hoc, training-free method by leveraging directional neighborhood consensus.<n>RPS samples multiple responses from a local neighborhood of related preferences to create a superior candidate pool.<n>Our work presents a practical, theoretically-grounded solution for enhancing the reliability of preference-aligned models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-23T12:39:20Z)
• Direct Preference Optimization with Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity: The Necessity of Ternary Preferences [14.686788596611246]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has become central to aligning large language models with human values.<n>Recent alternatives such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) simplify this pipeline by directly optimizing on preferences.<n>We propose a theoretical and algorithmic framework for fairness and personalization for diverse users in generative model alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-17T15:00:40Z)
• Beyond RLHF and NLHF: Population-Proportional Alignment under an Axiomatic Framework [7.065259679465175]
  We develop a novel preference learning framework capable of aligning aggregate opinions and policies proportionally with the true population distribution of evaluator preferences.<n>We propose a soft-max relaxation method that smoothly trade-offs population-proportional alignment with the selection of the Condorcet winner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T22:15:07Z)
• Multi-Level Aware Preference Learning: Enhancing RLHF for Complex Multi-Instruction Tasks [81.44256822500257]
  RLHF has emerged as a predominant approach for aligning artificial intelligence systems with human preferences.<n> RLHF exhibits insufficient compliance capabilities when confronted with complex multi-instruction tasks.<n>We propose a novel Multi-level Aware Preference Learning (MAPL) framework, capable of enhancing multi-instruction capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T08:33:11Z)
• In-context Ranking Preference Optimization [65.5489745857577]
  We propose an In-context Ranking Preference Optimization (IRPO) framework to optimize large language models (LLMs) based on ranking lists constructed during inference.<n>We show IRPO outperforms standard DPO approaches in ranking performance, highlighting its effectiveness in aligning LLMs with direct in-context ranking preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T23:06:12Z)
• Calibrated Multi-Preference Optimization for Aligning Diffusion Models [90.15024547673785]
  Calibrated Preference Optimization (CaPO) is a novel method to align text-to-image (T2I) diffusion models.<n>CaPO incorporates the general preference from multiple reward models without human annotated data.<n> Experimental results show that CaPO consistently outperforms prior methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T18:59:23Z)
• Jackpot! Alignment as a Maximal Lottery [13.984371386519424]
  We propose the use of a probabilistic Social Choice rule called emphmaximal lotteries as a replacement for RLHF.<n>We show that a family of alignment techniques, namely Nash Learning from Human Feedback (NLHF) citemunos2023nash and variants, approximate maximal lottery outcomes and thus inherit its beneficial properties.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-31T16:26:28Z)
• Multi-Preference Optimization: Generalizing DPO via Set-Level Contrasts [17.243429150450886]
  We propose $textbfMulti-Preference Optimization (MPO) to optimize over entire sets of responses.<n>MPO employs deviation-based weighting, which emphasizes outlier responses that deviate most from the mean reward.<n>We theoretically prove that MPO reduces alignment bias at a rate of $mathcalOleft(frac1sqrtnright)$ with respect to the number of responses per query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-05T21:50:22Z)
• Beyond the Binary: Capturing Diverse Preferences With Reward Regularization [15.518838657050173]
  We argue that this reliance on binary choices does not capture the broader, aggregate preferences of the target user in real-world tasks.<n>We introduce a simple yet effective method that augments existing binary preference datasets with synthetic preference judgments to estimate potential user disagreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-05T02:35:46Z)
• 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)
• 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.<n>We also propose preference score-based General Preference Optimization (GPO), which generalizes reward-based reinforcement learning from human feedback.<n>Our method may enhance the alignment of foundation models with nuanced human values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T04:22:55Z)
• Not All Preference Pairs Are Created Equal: A Recipe for Annotation-Efficient Iterative Preference Learning [81.69044784288005]
  Iterative preference learning requires online annotated preference labels. We study strategies to select worth-annotating response pairs for cost-efficient annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T06:49:16Z)
• Direct Preference Optimization With Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity: The Necessity of Ternary Preferences [14.686788596611246]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has become central to aligning large language models with human values.<n>Recent alternatives such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) simplify this pipeline by directly optimizing on preferences.<n>We propose a theoretical and algorithmic framework for fairness and personalization for diverse users in generative model alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-23T21:25:20Z)
• SetRank: A Setwise Bayesian Approach for Collaborative Ranking from Implicit Feedback [50.13745601531148]
  We propose a novel setwise Bayesian approach for collaborative ranking, namely SetRank, to accommodate the characteristics of implicit feedback in recommender system. Specifically, SetRank aims at maximizing the posterior probability of novel setwise preference comparisons. We also present the theoretical analysis of SetRank to show that the bound of excess risk can be proportional to $sqrtM/N$.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-23T06:40:48Z)

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.