mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

SuperHF: Supervised Iterative Learning from Human Feedback

arXiv 2310.16763 ↗First posted 25 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 10

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Reward modeling and RLHF

Abstract (arXiv)

While large language models demonstrate remarkable capabilities, they often present challenges in terms of safety, alignment with human values, and stability during training. Here, we focus on two prevalent methods used to align these models, Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). SFT is simple and robust, powering a host of open-source models, while RLHF is a more sophisticated method used in top-tier models like ChatGPT but also suffers from instability and susceptibility to reward hacking. We propose a novel approach, Supervised Iterative Learning from Human Feedback (SuperHF), which seeks to leverage the strengths of both methods. Our hypothesis is two-fold: that the reward model used in RLHF is critical for efficient data use and model generalization and that the use of Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) in RLHF may not be necessary and could contribute to instability issues. SuperHF replaces PPO with a simple supervised loss and a Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence prior. It creates its own training data by repeatedly sampling a batch of model outputs and filtering them through the reward model in an online learning regime. We then break down the reward optimization problem into three components: robustly optimizing the training rewards themselves, preventing reward hacking-exploitation of the reward model that degrades model performance-as measured by a novel METEOR similarity metric, and maintaining good performance on downstream evaluations. Our experimental results show SuperHF exceeds PPO-based RLHF on the training objective, easily and favorably trades off high reward with low reward hacking, improves downstream calibration, and performs the same on our GPT-4 based qualitative evaluation scheme all the while being significantly simpler to implement, highlighting SuperHF's potential as a competitive language model alignment technique.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reward modeling and RLHF, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 20 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Oct 2023.

Builds on

20 of 45 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Open Problems and Fundamental Limitations of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback27 Jul
  2. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model29 May
  3. 2021WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedback17 Dec

Other references · 17

  1. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  2. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  4. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
  5. 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,674
  6. 2021A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignmentcited by 1,023
  7. 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 805
  8. 2017A Deep Reinforced Model for Abstractive Summarizationcited by 364
  9. 2019Way Off-Policy Batch Deep Reinforcement Learning of Implicit Human Preferences in Dialogcited by 283
  10. 2022Quark: Controllable Text Generation with Reinforced Unlearningcited by 236
  11. 2023Do the Rewards Justify the Means? Measuring Trade-Offs Between Rewards and Ethical Behavior in the MACHIAVELLI Benchmarkcited by 174
  12. 2022RL with KL penalties is better viewed as Bayesian inferencecited by 130
5 more
  1. 2020A Distributional Approach to Controlled Text Generationcited by 117
  2. 2019On the Weaknesses of Reinforcement Learning for Neural Machine Translationcited by 82
  3. 2018Controllable Neural Story Plot Generation via Reward Shapingcited by 49
  4. 2021Controlling Conditional Language Models without Catastrophic Forgettingcited by 32
  5. 2021Energy-Based Models for Code Generation under Compilability Constraintscited by 10

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 4; 2026: 1.

10 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024RLHF Workflow: From Reward Modeling to Online RLHF
  2. 2023RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tears
  3. 2024RLHF Deciphered: A Critical Analysis of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback for LLMs
  4. 2023RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback
  5. 2026Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback: A Statistical Perspective
  6. 2025Robust Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback for Large Language Models Fine-Tuning
  7. 2024Sequence to Sequence Reward Modeling: Improving RLHF by Language Feedback
  8. 2025Provably Efficient Online RLHF with One-Pass Reward Modeling