CritiQ: Mining Data Quality Criteria from Human Preferences
Honglin Guo, Kai Lv, Qipeng Guo, Tianyi Liang, Zhiheng Xi, Demin Song, Qiuyinzhe Zhang, Yu Sun, Kai Chen, Xipeng Qiu, Tao Gui
Abstract
Language model heavily depends on highquality data for optimal performance. Existing approaches rely on manually designed heuristics, the perplexity of existing models, training classifiers, or careful prompt engineering, which require significant expert experience and human annotation effort while introduce biases. We introduce CRITIQ 1 , a novel data selection method that automatically mines criteria from human preferences for data quality with only ∼30 human-annotated pairs and performs efficient data selection. The main component, CRI-TIQ Flow, employs a manager agent to evolve quality criteria and worker agents to make pairwise judgments. We build a knowledge base that extracts quality criteria from previous work to boost CRITIQ Flow. Compared to perplexityand classifier-based methods, verbal criteria are more interpretable and have greater reusable value. After deriving the criteria, we train the CRITIQ Scorer to give quality scores and perform efficient data selection. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method in the code, math, and logic domains, achieving high accuracy on human-annotated test sets. To validate the quality of the selected data, we continually train Llama 3.2 models and observe improved performance on downstream tasks compared to uniform sampling. Ablation studies validate the benefits of the knowledge base and the reflection process. We analyze how criteria evolve and the effectiveness of majority voting.
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 64cef6e3-c36d-42c9-957c-5261a074484aCited by top-tier papers2
- AgentGym2: Benchmarking Large Language Model Agents in De-Idealized Real-World EnvironmentsZhiheng Xi, Dingwen Yang, Jiaqi Liu, Jixuan Huang et al.ACL 2026
- AgentGym-RL: An Open-Source Framework to Train LLM Agents for Long-Horizon Decision Making via Multi-Turn RLZhiheng Xi, Jixuan Huang, Chenyang Liao, Baodai Huang et al.ICLR 2026
Builds on11
- Large Language Models are Zero-Shot ReasonersTakeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 8,168 citations
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learningNoah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,828 citations
- Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-FeedbackAman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 4,972 citations
- Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code GenerationJiawei Liu, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Yuyao Wang, Lingming ZhangNeurIPS 2023 · 2,317 citations
- Data Selection for Language Models via Importance ResamplingSang Michael Xie, Shibani Santurkar, Tengyu Ma, Percy LiangNeurIPS 2023 · 383 citations
Related papers
- QuRating: Selecting High-Quality Data for Training Language ModelsAlexander Wettig, Aatmik Gupta, Saumya Malik, Danqi ChenICML 2024 · 138 citations
- Selection of LLM Fine-Tuning Data Based on Orthogonal RulesXiaomin Li, Mingye Gao, Zhiwei Zhang, Chang Yue et al.AAAI 2026 · 9 citations
- Removing Noise, not Finding Gold: Quality Filtering for Large-Scale PretrainingThiziri Nait Saada, Louis Béthune, Michal Klein, David Grangier et al.ICML 2026
- Evoke: Evoking Critical Thinking Abilities in LLMs via Reviewer-Author Prompt EditingXinyu Hu, Pengfei Tang, Simiao Zuo, Zihan Wang et al.ICLR 2024 · 14 citations
- DataMan: Data Manager for Pre-training Large Language ModelsRu Peng, Kexin Yang, Yawen Zeng, Junyang Lin et al.ICLR 2025
