Normalized Rewards for Preference Optimization
Shawn Im, Federico Danieli, Skyler Seto, Barry-John Theobald, Katherine Metcalf
Abstract
Direct Alignment Algorithms (DAAs) such as DPO have become a common way to post-train and align LLMs with human preferences. However, DAAs have been observed to over-optimize their implicit reward model and decrease the likelihood of preferred responses. This results in a decrease in the total likelihood assigned to responses seen in the preference dataset, potentially resulting in undesirable behavior. To counteract this undesired side-effect of DAAs, we examine the effect of using objectives that add a regularization term to maintain the total length-normalized probabilities of the chosen and rejected responses. To better understand over-optimization, we investigate how response likelihood changes are distributed over the tokens with and without regularization. We find that a significant portion of the likelihood changes are due to a small set of outlier tokens, which explains how DAAs improve generation quality despite decreasing the likelihoods of chosen responses. We apply the proposed regularization to reference-based (DPO) and reference-free (SimPO) methods and find (1) improved trade-offs between generation quality and general benchmark capability and (2) improvements in reward modeling across datasets. For example, on Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, we see both a >20% relative increase in AlpacaEval2 scores and >9% relative performance gains on general benchmarks. Additionally, we find that the added regularization term effectively mitigates the amount of displacement within preferred responses overall, and for the outlier tokens specifically, by utilizing low-likelihood tokens.
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 65eae998-abb4-444b-973f-5f696247fad0Builds on20
- 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
- Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic OptimizationKawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff, Dan Jurafsky et al.ICML 2024 · 973 citations
- Defining and Characterizing Reward GamingJoar Skalse, Nikolaus H. R. Howe, Dmitrii Krasheninnikov, David KruegerNeurIPS 2022 · 466 citations
- Iterative Preference Learning from Human Feedback: Bridging Theory and Practice for RLHF under KL-constraintWei Xiong, Hanze Dong, Chenlu Ye, Ziqi Wang et al.ICML 2024 · 346 citations
Related papers
- Earlier Tokens Contribute More: Learning Direct Preference Optimization From Temporal Decay PerspectiveRuichen Shao, Bei Li, Gangao Liu, Yang Chen et al.ICLR 2025
- Preference Optimization by Estimating the Ratio of the Data DistributionYeongmin Kim, HeeSun Bae, Byeonghu Na, Il-Chul MoonNeurIPS 2025 · 10 citations
- AlphaPO: Reward Shape Matters for LLM AlignmentAman Gupta, Shao Tang, Qingquan Song, Sirou Zhu et al.ICML 2025
- ConfPO: Exploiting Policy Model Confidence for Critical Token Selection in Preference OptimizationHee Suk Yoon, Eunseop Yoon, Mark A. Hasegawa-Johnson, Sungwoong Kim et al.ICML 2025
- Bootstrapping Language Models with DPO Implicit RewardsChangyu Chen, Zichen Liu, Chao Du, Tianyu Pang et al.ICLR 2025
