APM: Evaluating Style Personalization in LLMs with Arbitrary Preference Mappings

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.21063v1
• Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 11:47:40 GMT
• Title: APM: Evaluating Style Personalization in LLMs with Arbitrary Preference Mappings
• Abstract summary: We introduce the Arbitrary Preference Mapping benchmark, which maps user attributes to preferences about response traits.<n>Because $mathbfC$ carries no semantic content, models cannot exploit stereotypical associations.<n>We adapt retrieval-augmented, prompt-optimization, and routing personalization methods and evaluate them on Llama-3.1-8B and Qwen-3.5-27B.
• Score: 43.5967188676583
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Typical LLM responses tend to follow a default style, even though users often have distinct preferences regarding tone, verbosity, and formality that they do not explicitly state in their prompts. Evaluating whether personalization methods can adapt to these implicit preferences is challenging, since users typically provide prompts rather than reference responses, style preferences are not factually verifiable, and reference-free LLM judges may conflate personalization with general response quality. To address these challenges, we introduce the Arbitrary Preference Mapping (APM) benchmark, which decouples user attributes (e.g. enthusiastic) from response principles (e.g. persuasive) via a hidden, randomized mapping $\mathbf{C}$ that maps user attributes to preferences about response traits. Because $\mathbf{C}$ carries no semantic content and is resampled across runs, models cannot exploit stereotypical associations and must infer preferences from conversation history. Using this unbiased evaluation methodology, we adapt retrieval-augmented, prompt-optimization, and routing personalization methods and evaluate them on Llama-3.1-8B and Qwen-3.5-27B. Our results show that routing is the most reliable approach, while RAG only improves with the stronger base LLM, and soft prompt optimization fails to improve significantly over a non-personalized baseline. Our extensive evaluation reveals that in this realistic setting, personalization remains challenging, but our adapted methods show promise.

Related papers

• Private Direct Preference Optimization for LLM Alignment [77.56374641532715]
  Direct preference optimization (DPO) is now a standard method for aligning large language models (LLMs) using human preference data.<n>In this paper, we formalize preference privacy, a label-DP-style privacy notion for DPO.<n>We then design PrivDPO, a DPO variant that enforces preference privacy while remaining compatible with large-scale LLM training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T16:51:02Z)
• Embedding by Elicitation: Dynamic Representations for Bayesian Optimization of System Prompts [22.060204303535187]
  System prompts are a central control mechanism in modern AI systems, shaping behavior across conversations, tasks, and user populations.<n>We study this aggregate feedback setting as sample-constrained black-box optimization over discrete, variable-length text.<n>We introduce ReElicit, a Bayesian optimization framework based on emphembedding by elicitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T20:28:17Z)
• Towards Realistic Personalization: Evaluating Long-Horizon Preference Following in Personalized User-LLM Interactions [50.70965714314064]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly serving as personal assistants, where users share complex and diverse preferences over extended interactions.<n>This work proposes RealPref, a benchmark for evaluating realistic preference-following in personalized user-LLM interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T15:42:43Z)
• PrLM: Learning Explicit Reasoning for Personalized RAG via Contrastive Reward Optimization [4.624026598342624]
  We propose PrLM, a reinforcement learning framework that trains LLMs to explicitly reason over retrieved user profiles.<n>PrLM effectively learns from user responses without requiring annotated reasoning paths.<n>Experiments on three personalized text generation datasets show that PrLM outperforms existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-10T13:37:26Z)
• Comparing Bad Apples to Good Oranges: Aligning Large Language Models via Joint Preference Optimization [105.3612692153615]
  We propose a new axis based on eliciting preferences jointly over instruction-response pairs.<n>Joint preferences over instruction and response pairs can significantly enhance the alignment of large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-31T02:05:40Z)
• RLVF: Learning from Verbal Feedback without Overgeneralization [94.19501420241188]
  We study the problem of incorporating verbal feedback without such overgeneralization. We develop a new method Contextualized Critiques with Constrained Preference Optimization (C3PO) Our approach effectively applies verbal feedback to relevant scenarios while preserving existing behaviors for other contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T18:50:24Z)
• Relative Preference Optimization: Enhancing LLM Alignment through Contrasting Responses across Identical and Diverse Prompts [95.09994361995389]
  Relative Preference Optimization (RPO) is designed to discern between more and less preferred responses derived from both identical and related prompts. RPO has demonstrated a superior ability to align large language models with user preferences and to improve their adaptability during the training process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T22:47:57Z)

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.