arXiv:2609.38860v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Learning from human preferences is central to large language model (LLM) alignment, but human preference annotation is costly. Active preference lear...
By Zhongman Du, Huiming Zhang, Haodong Zhu, Baochang Zhang
arXiv:2512.23067v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Personalized alignment from preference data has focused primarily on improving personal reward model (RM) accuracy, with the implicit assumption th...
By Fady Rezk, Yuangang Pan, Chuan-Sheng Foo, Xun Xu, Nancy Chen, Henry Gouk, Timothy Hospedales
arXiv:2608.30902v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Adapting large language models to user-specific preferences is often constrained by the cost of human annotation, making preference optimisation imprac...
By Alessio Galatolo, Meriem Beloucif
arXiv:2604. 07343v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Pluralistic alignment has emerged as a critical frontier in the development of Large Language Models (LLMs), with reward models (RMs) serving as a central mechanism for capturing diverse human values.
By Qiyao Ma, Dechen Gao, Rui Cai, Boqi Zhao, Hanchu Zhou, Junshan Zhang, Zhe Zhao
arXiv:2504. 06659v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Despite advances in Preference Alignment (PA) for Large Language Models (LLMs), mainstream methods like reinforcement learning with human feedback face notable challenges.
By Xiaohua Feng, Yuyuan Li, Huwei Ji, Jiaming Zhang, Li Zhang, Tianyu Du, Chaochao Chen
arXiv:2510. 05342v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has emerged as a simple and effective method for aligning large language models.
By Hyung Gyu Rho
arXiv:2607. 16239v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI judges offer a scalable, low-cost alternative to human evaluation, but their outputs can be biased relative to human preferences and highly item-dependent, varying across judges, tasks, and domains.
By Lei Shi, Anlan Zhang, Rita Lyu, Zhengmian Hu, Tong Yu, David Arbour, Avi Feller, Saayan Mitra, Ritwik Sinha
arXiv:2607. 03248v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The alignment of large language models with human preferences is commonly achieved through Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback or Direct Preference Optimization.
By Jialiang Wang, Xianming Liu, Xiong Zhou, Hui Liu, Haoliang Li
The paper introduces DIAL, a framework that uses large language models (LLMs) as judges while mitigating position bias and aligning their judgments with human preferences. DIAL separates judge‑specific position effects, learns shared structure in debiased LLM preferences, and adaptively calibrates this structure toward human targets using limited human comparisons. Experiments on simulations and three human‑preference benchmarks show that DIAL remains robust to unbalanced response order, achieves strong human‑aligned rankings with few labels, and adapts when LLM information is imperfect, supported by a real‑data study of over 410K judgments from 21 LLM judges.
By Zesheng Cai, Yingqi Fan, Sichang Chen, Jin-Hong Du
The paper introduces CurriPO, a tree‑structured curriculum that automatically adapts to diverse user reward models in AI alignment tasks. By exploiting the natural hierarchy between easy‑ and hard‑to‑optimize reward models, CurriPO covers a broad user population in a single traversal, reusing previously incorporated reward models. Experiments on personalized continuous control show that CurriPO improves population satisfaction by 1.2–2.1× over the strongest baseline while cutting training time and better serving users traditionally underserved by conventional optimization.
By Taehyung Kim, Jongeun Choi
arXiv:2606. 19607v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Preference-based post-training has become a central paradigm for aligning language models.
By Jiangze Han, Vineet Goyal, Will Ma
The paper investigates whether fine‑tuning large language models (LLMs) on value survey responses can shift their value‑conditioned outputs and downstream behavior. Researchers first estimate baseline value profiles for several open‑source LLMs using the ten Schwartz values, then fine‑tune the models on survey‑style supervision that selectively alters target value ratings while preserving non‑target values. The resulting shifts are evaluated on held‑out survey questions and on out‑of‑domain behavioral proxies, such as a contextual moral‑judgment benchmark from Reddit AITA posts and a text‑based interactive decision‑making benchmark. The study finds that survey‑based supervision can change both survey responses and downstream behavior, but the transfer is strongly model‑ and value‑dependent and influenced by how value descriptions are framed.
By Shangrui Nie, Florian Mai, David Kacz\'er, Charles Welch, Zhixue Zhao, Lucie Flek