How to Evaluate Reward Models for RLHF
Evan Frick, Tianle Li, Connor Chen, Wei-Lin Chiang, Anastasios Nikolas Angelopoulos, Jiantao Jiao, Banghua Zhu, Joseph E. Gonzalez, Ion Stoica
Abstract
We introduce a new benchmark for reward models that quantifies their ability to produce strong language models through RLHF (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback). The gold-standard approach is to run a full RLHF training pipeline and directly probe downstream LLM performance. However, this process is prohibitively expensive. To address this, we build a predictive model of downstream LLM performance by evaluating the reward model on proxy tasks. These proxy tasks consist of a large-scale human preference and a verifiable correctness preference dataset, in which we measure 12 metrics across 12 domains. To investigate which reward model metrics are most correlated to gold-standard RLHF outcomes, we launch an end-to-end RLHF experiment on a large-scale crowdsourced human preference platform to view real reward model downstream performance as ground truth. Ultimately, we compile our data and findings into Preference Proxy Evaluations (PPE), the first reward model benchmark explicitly linked to post-RLHF real-world human preference performance, which we open-source for public use and further development. Our code and evaluations can be found at https://github.com/lmarena/PPE .
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 f41d963b-0605-47e6-94aa-b5c3957a18d3Cited by top-tier papers44
- Skywork-Reward-V2: Scaling Preference Data Curation via Human-AI SynergyChris Yuhao Liu, Liang Zeng, Yuzhen Xiao, Jujie He et al.ICLR 2026 · 211 citations
- RewardBench 2: Advancing Reward Model EvaluationSaumya Malik, Valentina Pyatkin, Sander Land, Jacob Morrison et al.ICLR 2026 · 139 citations
- OpenRubrics: Towards Scalable Synthetic Rubric Generation for Reward Modeling and LLM AlignmentTianci Liu, Ran Xu, Tony Yu, Ilgee Hong et al.ACL 2026 · 75 citations
- J1: Incentivizing Thinking in LLM-as-a-Judge via Reinforcement LearningChenxi Whitehouse, Tianlu Wang, Ping Yu, Xian Li et al.ICLR 2026 · 74 citations
- What Makes a Reward Model a Good Teacher? An Optimization PerspectiveNoam Razin, Zixuan Wang, Hubert Strauss, Stanley Wei et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 73 citations
Builds on9
- 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
- Scaling Laws for Reward Model OveroptimizationLeo Gao, John Schulman, Jacob HiltonICML 2023 · 963 citations
- AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human FeedbackYann Dubois, Chen Xuechen Li, Rohan Taori, Tianyi Zhang et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 948 citations
Related papers
- A Systematic Analysis of Base Model Choice for Reward ModelingKian Ahrabian, Pegah Jandaghi, Negar Mokhberian, Sai Praneeth Karimireddy et al.EMNLP 2025
- M-RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models in Multilingual SettingsSrishti Gureja, Lester James Validad Miranda, Shayekh Bin Islam, Rishabh Maheshwary et al.ACL 2025
- A Regret Minimization Framework on Preference Learning in Large Language ModelsSuhwan Kim, Taehyun Cho, Youngsoo Jang, Geon-Hyeong Kim et al.ICML 2026
- Rethinking Reward Model Evaluation Through the Lens of Reward OveroptimizationSunghwan Kim, Dongjin Kang, Taeyoon Kwon, Hyungjoo Chae et al.ACL 2025
- Implicit Safety Alignment from Crowd PreferencesQian Lin, Daniel S BrownICML 2026
