The paper introduces Personalized Group Relative Policy Optimization (P‑GRPO), a new alignment framework for large language models that separates advantage estimation from immediate batch statistics. By normalizing advantages using preference‑group‑specific reward histories instead of the concurrent generation group, P‑GRPO maintains contrastive signals for distinct user preferences. Experiments across various tasks show that P‑GRPO converges faster and yields higher rewards than standard GRPO, improving alignment with heterogeneous human preferences while preserving general capabilities.
By Jialu Wang, Heinrich Peters, Asad A. Butt, Navid Hashemi, Alireza Hashemi, Pouya M. Ghari, Joseph Hoover, James Rae, Morteza Dehghani
arXiv:2502.14643v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) is a widely adopted offline algorithm for preference-based reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF),...
By Gengxu Li, Tingyu Xia, Yi Chang, Yuan Wu
arXiv:2503. 00539v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has evolved to be one of the main methods for fine-tuning large language models (LLMs).
By Debmalya Mandal, Paulius Sasnauskas, Goran Radanovic
arXiv:2608. 09507v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Natural language user preferences provide an interpretable interface for LLM personalization.
By Yuting Liu, Wei Wu, Jianzhe Zhao, Guibing Guo
arXiv:2509. 22851v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Margin-based optimization is fundamental to improving generalization and robustness in classification tasks.
By Yaswanth Chittepu, Prasann Singhal, Greg Durrett, Scott Niekum
arXiv:2509. 23982v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Preference alignment is a critical step in making Large Language Models (LLMs) useful and aligned with (human) preferences.
By Lucio La Cava, Andrea Tagarelli
arXiv:2606. 04807v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mitigating social bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) presents a distinct alignment challenge: unlike verifiable tasks, bias lacks a single ground truth, creating a high-variance, subjective reward landscape.
By Saket Reddy, Ke Yang, ChengXiang Zhai
arXiv:2602. 09533v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Direct preference optimization (DPO) has emerged as a promising approach for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences.
By Masanari Oi, Mahiro Ukai, Masahiro Kaneko, Naoaki Okazaki, Nakamasa Inoue
arXiv:2607. 16240v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Direct Alignment Algorithms (DAAs) such as DPO have become a common way to post-train and align LLMs with human preferences.
By Shawn Im, Federico Danieli, Skyler Seto, Barry-John Theobald, Katherine Metcalf
The paper introduces GAP-DPO, a method for personalizing large language models by selecting preference pairs based on gradient alignment with user utility. It formalizes personalized preference learning as a geometry‑aligned optimization problem, showing that off‑policy sampling can shift DPO updates from error correction to reinforcement when preference margins align with utility gradients. Experiments demonstrate that GAP‑DPO improves stylistic fidelity, preference alignment, and overall generation quality over standard DPO variants.
By Ruoming Jin, Xinyu Li, Hao Zhou, Jianfeng Zhu, Ruixin Guo, Feodor Dragan, Lei Xu, Haixun Wang, Yang Zhou
arXiv:2607. 09796v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has become an important method for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences because it removes the need for explicit reward modeling and reinforcement learning optimization.
By Hua Qu, Yifan Li, Xiaodong Yuan
GroupDPO introduces a memory‑efficient approach to group‑wise direct preference optimization for aligning large language models. By using first‑order linearization with per‑response coefficients, the method decouples samples during backpropagation, dramatically reducing peak memory usage and enabling scalable training with larger groups. Experiments in both offline and online settings show that leveraging multiple responses consistently outperforms single‑pair training, and adding a negative log‑likelihood term on positive responses is essential for performance gains and training stability.
By Jixuan Leng, Si Si, Hsiang-Fu Yu, Vinod Raman, Inderjit S. Dhillon