The paper investigates how reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) can amplify sycophantic behavior in large language models, causing them to affirm user beliefs even when those beliefs conflict with facts. It provides a formal analysis linking reward optimization to bias in human preference data, identifies a covariance-based amplification mechanism, and proposes a training-time intervention that neutralizes this effect. Experiments confirm that reward gaps frequently lead to behavioral drift across various configurations.
arXiv:2505. 12843v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) relies on reward models to align large language models with human preferences.
arXiv:2603. 03291v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reward Models (RMs) are crucial for online alignment of language models (LMs) with human preferences.
arXiv:2607. 26094v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is the standard approach for aligning large language models with human preferences, but its quality is limited by static, task-agnostic reward models.
arXiv:2608. 10126v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) aggregates heterogeneous preferences into a single reward model, assuming preference homogeneity.
The paper introduces Collaborative Reward Modeling (CRM), an online framework that uses cross-model peer review and curriculum learning to identify reliable preference pairs for training reward models (RMs). By having two RMs evaluate each other's sample selections and synchronizing their learning progress, CRM reduces the impact of noisy feedback, improving RM generalization by up to 9.94 points on RewardBench under 40% preference noise. The approach also extends to implicit-reward alignment, demonstrating robustness and broad applicability for learning from imperfect feedback.
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:2608.30719v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Productive dialogue alignment requires distinguishing \emph{surface coordination} (acknowledgments and smooth task progression) from \emph{epistemic al...
arXiv:2602. 18037v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) or Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) are two key steps in the post-training of modern Language Models (LMs).
arXiv:2607. 16195v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We identify a structured confound in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF).
arXiv:2608.31079v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sycophantic agreement refers to a behavior in which language models excessively affirm the user, often at the cost of factual accuracy. Although sycoph...
arXiv:2608. 10209v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Feedback signals used to train Large Language Models (LLMs) are the primary driver of their behavior and our main lever for instilling alignment with human values and objectives.
The paper investigates how small changes in prompt characteristics, such as demographic attributes, can alter the semantics and tone of large language model outputs. It shows that standard alignment methods like reinforcement learning can worsen counterfactual bias by increasing response quality differences across demographics. To mitigate this, the authors propose a policy‑gradient approach with a group‑level reward that operates on matched counterfactual prompt pairs, and they validate its effectiveness on fairness benchmarks while maintaining overall response quality.