As Simple as Fine-tuning: LLM Alignment via Bidirectional Negative Feedback Loss
Xin Mao, Huimin Xu, Feng-Lin Li, Ziqi Jin, Wang Chen, Wei Zhang, Anh Tuan Luu
Abstract
Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has emerged as a more computationally efficient alternative to Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) with Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), eliminating the need for reward models and online sampling. Despite these benefits, DPO and its variants remain sensitive to hyper-parameters and prone to instability, particularly on mathematical datasets. We argue that these issues arise from the unidirectional likelihood-derivative negative feedback inherent in the log-likelihood loss function. To address this, we propose a novel LLM alignment loss that establishes a stable Bidirectional Negative Feedback (BNF) during optimization. Our proposed BNF loss eliminates the need for pairwise contrastive losses and does not require any extra tunable hyperparameters or pairwise preference data, streamlining the alignment pipeline to be as simple as supervised fine-tuning. We conduct extensive experiments across two challenging QA benchmarks and four reasoning benchmarks. The experimental results show that BNF achieves comparable performance to the best methods on QA benchmarks, while its performance decrease on the four reasoning benchmarks is significantly lower compared to the best methods, thus striking a better balance between value alignment and reasoning ability. In addition, we further validate the performance of BNF on non-pairwise datasets, and conduct in-depth analysis of log-likelihood and logit shifts across different preference optimization methods. Github Url: https://github.com/MaoXinn/BNF .
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 40850ab2-c874-4ceb-9282-725ae6e88a64Builds on13
- 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
- Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human PreferenceWei-Lin Chiang, Lianmin Zheng, Ying Sheng, Anastasios Nikolas Angelopoulos et al.ICML 2024 · 1,212 citations
- Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic OptimizationKawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff, Dan Jurafsky et al.ICML 2024 · 973 citations
- Contrastive Preference Optimization: Pushing the Boundaries of LLM Performance in Machine TranslationHaoran Xu, Amr Sharaf, Yunmo Chen, Weiting Tan et al.ICML 2024 · 447 citations
Related papers
- VPO: Reasoning Preferences Optimization Based on V-Usable InformationZecheng Wang, Chunshan Li, Yupeng Zhang, Han Liu et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 1 citation
- Back to Basics: Revisiting REINFORCE-Style Optimization for Learning from Human Feedback in LLMsArash Ahmadian, Chris Cremer, Matthias Gallé, Marzieh Fadaee et al.ACL 2024 · 20 citations
- Proximalized Preference Optimization for Diverse Feedback Types: A Decomposed Perspective on DPOKaiyang Guo, Yinchuan Li, Zhitang ChenNeurIPS 2025 · 7 citations
- Earlier Tokens Contribute More: Learning Direct Preference Optimization From Temporal Decay PerspectiveRuichen Shao, Bei Li, Gangao Liu, Yang Chen 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
