Energy-Based Preference Model Offers Better Offline Alignment than the Bradley-Terry Preference Model
Reviewed by Pithpith:6CUDVGOGopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Since the debut of DPO, it has been shown that aligning a target LLM with human preferences via the KL-constrained RLHF loss is mathematically equivalent to a special kind of reward modeling task. Concretely, the task requires: 1) using the target LLM to parameterize the reward model, and 2) tuning the reward model so that it has a 1:1 linear relationship with the true reward. However, we identify a significant issue: the DPO loss might have multiple minimizers, of which only one satisfies the required linearity condition. The problem arises from a well-known issue of the underlying Bradley-Terry preference model: it does not always have a unique maximum likelihood estimator (MLE). Consequently,the minimizer of the RLHF loss might be unattainable because it is merely one among many minimizers of the DPO loss. As a better alternative, we propose an energy-based model (EBM) that always has a unique MLE, inherently satisfying the linearity requirement. To approximate the MLE in practice, we propose a contrastive loss named Energy Preference Alignment (EPA), wherein each positive sample is contrasted against one or more strong negatives as well as many free weak negatives. Theoretical properties of our EBM enable the approximation error of EPA to almost surely vanish when a sufficient number of negatives are used. Empirically, we demonstrate that EPA consistently delivers better performance on open benchmarks compared to DPO, thereby showing the superiority of our EBM.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Relative Density Ratio Optimization for Stable and Statistically Consistent Model Alignment
Relative density ratio optimization stabilizes direct density ratio estimation for language model alignment while preserving statistical consistency without assuming a Bradley-Terry preference model.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.