arXiv:2610. 41114v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Optimizing a proxy objective can improve human-perceived quality, but the resulting gain can vary with optimization strength.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2608. 16210v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Aggregate accuracy hides where models succeed and fail.
arXiv:2609.01244v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Every supervised fine-tuning run forces the same chain of decisions, such as learning rate, batch size, LoRA or full fine-tuning, how many epochs, whic...
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.
Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is often treated as a capability-adaptation step, while alignment is attributed to later preference optimization or reinforcement learning. This separation is incomplete: when examples are scored and kept online during fine-tuning, the choice of which data to train on already changes the model's behavioral preferences.
arXiv:2608. 00915v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Uplift modeling (conditional-average-treatment-effect estimation) drives personalized targeting, yet published uplift benchmarks frequently disagree on which estimator performs best; we show the disagreement is substantially about metrics, not models.
arXiv:2607. 07023v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is often treated as a capability-adaptation step, while alignment is attributed to later preference optimization or reinforcement learning.