REVIEW 8 cited by
A Survey on Human Preference Learning for Large Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The recent surge of versatile large language models (LLMs) largely depends on aligning increasingly capable foundation models with human intentions by preference learning, enhancing LLMs with excellent applicability and effectiveness in a wide range of contexts. Despite the numerous related studies conducted, a perspective on how human preferences are introduced into LLMs remains limited, which may prevent a deeper comprehension of the relationships between human preferences and LLMs as well as the realization of their limitations. In this survey, we review the progress in exploring human preference learning for LLMs from a preference-centered perspective, covering the sources and formats of preference feedback, the modeling and usage of preference signals, as well as the evaluation of the aligned LLMs. We first categorize the human feedback according to data sources and formats. We then summarize techniques for human preferences modeling and compare the advantages and disadvantages of different schools of models. Moreover, we present various preference usage methods sorted by the objectives to utilize human preference signals. Finally, we summarize some prevailing approaches to evaluate LLMs in terms of alignment with human intentions and discuss our outlooks on the human intention alignment for LLMs.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
Internal Pluralism and the Limits of Pairwise Comparisons
Under internal pluralism, forced local pairwise comparisons erase inseparable priorities and distort conflicted answers, while allowing indecision reports can sharply reduce queries needed to learn preference weights.
-
Preference learning made easy: Everything should be understood through win rate
Under two axioms (preference-consistency and prevalence-consistency), the only distribution-grounded evaluation for preference learning is h-win rate, and most popular alignment methods can be classified by whether th...
-
Hi-TTRL: Regulating Consensus with Hints for Test-Time Reinforcement Learning
Hi-TTRL regulates the strength of answer agreement during sampling-stage hints, improving test-time reinforcement learning over standard majority-vote TTRL.
-
Large Language Models for Next-Generation Wireless Network Management: A Survey and Tutorial
A survey and tutorial that organizes LLM-enabled wireless network optimization into formulation, solution, and verification stages, with case studies drawn from the authors' own prior papers.
-
Listwise Preference Alignment Optimization for Tail Item Recommendation
The paper applies a listwise softmax preference loss with head-item negative sampling and tail reweighting to improve long-tail item recommendation.
-
Data Diversification Methods In Alignment Enhance Math Performance In LLMs
DTS, which generates diverse solution strategies before writing solutions, improves GSM8K by 7.1 points and MATH by 4.2 points over an untuned base model at 1.03x baseline compute.
-
Multi-level Value Alignment in Agentic AI Systems: Survey and Perspectives
A survey proposes a macro-meso-micro value framework for agentic AI alignment and maps applications, methods, and benchmarks onto it.
-
Reinforcement Learning Meets Large Language Models: A Survey of Advancements and Applications Across the LLM Lifecycle
A survey that maps reinforcement learning methods, datasets, benchmarks, and open-source tools across the full training lifecycle of large language models, focusing on verifiable-reward reasoning.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.