Proximalized Preference Optimization for Diverse Feedback Types: A Decomposed Perspective on DPO
Kaiyang Guo, Yinchuan Li, Zhitang Chen
Abstract
Direct alignment methods typically train large language models (LLMs) by contrasting the likelihoods of preferred and dispreferred responses. While effective at capturing relative preferences, these methods are widely observed to suppress the absolute likelihoods of example responses. As a result, aligned models can deviate from expected patterns, exhibiting rewar-hacking effect even without an explicit reward model. This fundamental limitation of contrastive alignment, which we term likelihood underdetermination, motivates us to revisit direct preference optimization (DPO) -- the seminal direct alignment method. Interestingly, we show that the DPO loss admits a principled decomposition. The reformulated loss not only extends naturally to a broader range of feedback types, but also unveils the root cause of likelihood underdetermination. Specifically, we identify that standard DPO implicitly oversimplifies a regularizer in the reformulated loss; restoring this full term effectively resolves the underdetermination. Building on these insights, we introduce PRoximalized PReference Optimization (PRO), a unified alignment method that accommodates diverse feedback types while eliminating likelihood underdetermination through an efficient approximation of the full regularizer. Empirical evaluations demonstrate the consistent superiority of PRO over existing methods across pairwise, binary and scalar feedback.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 25c3ac71-45f7-4e4d-8d4a-1a7278fef60cBuilds on29
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and ScalingStella Biderman, Hailey Schoelkopf, Quentin Gregory Anthony, Herbie Bradley et al.ICML 2023 · 1,822 citations
- Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic OptimizationKawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff, Dan Jurafsky et al.ICML 2024 · 973 citations
- Scaling Laws for Reward Model OveroptimizationLeo Gao, John Schulman, Jacob HiltonICML 2023 · 963 citations
Related papers
- Cal-DPO: Calibrated Direct Preference Optimization for Language Model AlignmentTeng Xiao, Yige Yuan, Huaisheng Zhu, Mingxiao Li et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 76 citations
- AlignDistil: Token-Level Language Model Alignment as Adaptive Policy DistillationSongming Zhang, Xue Zhang, Tong Zhang, Bojie Hu et al.ACL 2025
- As Simple as Fine-tuning: LLM Alignment via Bidirectional Negative Feedback LossXin Mao, Huimin Xu, Feng-Lin Li, Ziqi Jin et al.ICLR 2025
- 3D-Properties: Identifying Challenges in DPO and Charting a Path ForwardYuzi Yan, Yibo Miao, Jialian Li, Yipin Zhang et al.ICLR 2025
- Is DPO Superior to PPO for LLM Alignment? A Comprehensive StudyShusheng Xu, Wei Fu, Jiaxuan Gao, Wenjie Ye et al.ICML 2024 · 274 citations
