Preference-Strength-Aware Self-Improving Alignment with Generative Preference Models
Yuanzhao Zhai, Zhuo Zhang, Cheng Yang, Kele Xu, Yue Yu, Wei Li, Hui Wang, Zenglin Xu, Dawei Feng, Bo Ding, Huaimin Wang
Abstract
Self-improving alignment leveraging large language models (LLMs) to automatically generate synthetic preference data has garnered significant attention as a means of reducing reliance on human labelers. These methods typically employ the LLM-as-a-judge mechanism, where the LLM generates responses and then employs itself to judge which response best aligns with the given prompt for curating the binary self-preferred dataset. However, these methods encounter two major challenges: (1) LLM-as-a-judge often produces error-prone evaluations, resulting in low-quality preference annotation, and (2) their optimization strategies often overlook the strength of preferences within binary pairs, leading to overfitting. This paper proposes a novel method, Preference-Strength-aware Optimization (PSO), to address these issues. Specifically, PSO frames the preference annotation process as a judgment token prediction task using the generative preference model to produce reliable judgments. The predicted judgment token indicates the preferred response and its corresponding probability reflects the disparity between responses, referred to as preference strength. Based on this strength, we introduce a new preference-strength-aware loss to adaptively reweight the impact of different response pairs on optimization, concentrating the model's learning on high-quality response pairs. Our experiments demonstrate that PSO significantly improves performance in preference benchmarks, achieving stronger alignment with human preferences, reducing verbose responses, and mitigating overfitting. Furthermore, PSO exhibits robust generalization and sample efficiency, offering a scalable and promising solution for LLM alignment without relying on human-annotated preferences.
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.
Builds on17
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- 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
- SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free RewardYu Meng, Mengzhou Xia, Danqi ChenNeurIPS 2024 · 1,203 citations
- Scaling Laws for Reward Model OveroptimizationLeo Gao, John Schulman, Jacob HiltonICML 2023 · 963 citations
Related papers
- Direct Large Language Model Alignment Through Self-Rewarding Contrastive Prompt DistillationAiwei Liu, Haoping Bai, Zhiyun Lu, Xiang Kong et al.ACL 2024 · 4 citations
- CREAM: Consistency Regularized Self-Rewarding Language ModelsZhaoyang Wang, Weilei He, Zhiyuan Liang, Xuchao Zhang et al.ICLR 2025
- When Weak LLMs Speak with Confidence, Preference Alignment Gets StrongerAmirabbas Afzali, Myeongho Jeon, Maria BrbicICLR 2026
- Dynamic Rewarding with Prompt Optimization Enables Tuning-free Self-Alignment of Language ModelsSomanshu Singla, Zhen Wang, Tianyang Liu, Abdullah Ashfaq et al.EMNLP 2024 · 1 citation
- Learning LLM-as-a-Judge for Preference AlignmentZiyi Ye, Xiangsheng Li, Qiuchi Li, Qingyao Ai et al.ICLR 2025
