arXiv:2607. 16232v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The growing use of statistical learning algorithms to infer human preferences from high-dimensional choice data runs up against a fundamental challenge: choice alternatives typically differ in many ways simultaneously, so it is generally unclear which factors actually drove an observed decision and should be credited as preferences.
arXiv:2603.04191v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly serving as personal assistants, where users may share individual preferences over extended interactio...
arXiv:2609.15972v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As language models become more capable, long-term collaboration in learning, reasoning, and decision-making calls for a deeper understanding of the p...
arXiv:2608. 09507v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Natural language user preferences provide an interpretable interface for LLM personalization.
arXiv:2510. 11194v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Personalized alignment is crucial for enabling Large Language Models (LLMs) to engage effectively in user-centric interactions.
PADM'E is a method for synthesizing preference‑aligned data to meta‑evaluate language‑model (LM) evaluators of agentic behaviors. It reframes meta‑evaluation as a preference judgment problem, generating criterion‑based data with small LMs and no human involvement. In a prototype, PADM'E produced 1,000 samples across four domains and three criteria, and human validation showed agreement with human judgment rising from 73% to 85% compared to a naive baseline.
arXiv:2608. 08889v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recommendation systems thrive on personalization, where ''correctness'' is rarely a binary truth but a matter of subjective human preference.
Large Language Models (LLMs) as judges across various scenarios such as assessing model responses is becoming an increasingly accepted paradigm. However, existing judgment approaches often rely on trained judgers using fixed preference data, which tend to overlook diverse user preferences and struggle to adapt to real-world human-AI dialogue scenarios.
The paper investigates whether using a language model’s memory to personalize responses aligns with user preferences. By collecting about 1,000 pairwise judgments from 87 participants on ChatGPT queries that included personal memories, the authors find that memory‑conditioned responses are not consistently preferred and that users sometimes strongly favor non‑memory responses. An automatic reward model trained on these judgments achieves 72.8% preference prediction accuracy and outperforms existing baselines, highlighting the need for evaluation and optimization objectives that better reflect user preferences for memory use.
arXiv:2606. 09124v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has enabled progress on reasoning-intensive tasks by relying on task-specific verifiers that provide automated correctness signals.
arXiv:2606. 06614v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Despite growing interest, most evaluations of large language models' (LLMs') personalization abilities have relied on synthetic data.
The paper investigates how reinforcement learning can cause large language model agents to adopt shortcut policies for tool use, relying on superficial prompt cues rather than actual task needs. By creating synthetic environments that mix factual QA and math reasoning, the authors show that agents often invoke tools when cues are present, even when those tools are unnecessary, with spurious invocation rates rising up to 39%. They find that shortcut learning occurs mainly when agents have already mastered the target tool and that semantic alignment between cues and tools amplifies the effect. To counter this, they propose a dense, decision-level reward where an LLM judge assesses tool necessity, which reduces cue-driven tool use while maintaining performance.