Learning Reward and Policy Jointly from Demonstration and Preference Improves Alignment
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Reward modeling and RLHF
Abstract (arXiv)
Aligning human preference and value is an important requirement for building contemporary foundation models and embodied AI. However, popular approaches such as reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) break down the task into successive stages, such as supervised fine-tuning (SFT), reward modeling (RM), and reinforcement learning (RL), each performing one specific learning task. Such a sequential approach results in serious issues such as significant under-utilization of data and distribution mismatch between the learned reward model and generated policy, which eventually lead to poor alignment performance. We develop a single stage approach named Alignment with Integrated Human Feedback (AIHF), capable of integrating both human preference and demonstration to train reward models and the policy. The proposed approach admits a suite of efficient algorithms, which can easily reduce to, and leverage, popular alignment algorithms such as RLHF and Directly Policy Optimization (DPO), and only requires minor changes to the existing alignment pipelines. We demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed solutions with extensive experiments involving alignment problems in LLMs and robotic control problems in MuJoCo. We observe that the proposed solutions outperform the existing alignment algorithms such as RLHF and DPO by large margins, especially when the amount of high-quality preference data is relatively limited.
Key facts. Cited by 4 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 49 of its 72 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2024.
Builds on
49 of 72 references.
Closest ancestors · 11
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Provably Mitigating Overoptimization in RLHF: Your SFT Loss is Implicitly an Adversarial Regularizer26 May
- 2024RLHF Workflow: From Reward Modeling to Online RLHF13 May
- 2024RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modeling20 Mar
- 2023Iterative Preference Learning from Human Feedback: Bridging Theory and Practice for RLHF under KL-Constraint18 Dec
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model29 May
- 2023Inverse Preference Learning: Preference-based RL without a Reward Function24 May
- 2023RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tears11 Apr
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback12 Apr
- 2021Learning Multimodal Rewards from Rankings27 Sep
- 2018Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research direction19 Nov
- 2018Reward learning from human preferences and demonstrations in Atari15 Nov
Other references · 38
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,767
- 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
- 2018Soft Actor-Critic: Off-Policy Maximum Entropy Deep Reinforcement Learning with a Stochastic Actorcited by 4,635
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
- 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
26 more
- 2019ZeRO: Memory Optimizations Toward Training Trillion Parameter Modelscited by 1,278
- 2019Dota 2 with Large Scale Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 1,084
- 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferencescited by 906
- 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 828
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 805
- 2018QT-Opt: Scalable Deep Reinforcement Learning for Vision-Based Robotic Manipulationcited by 730
- 2024ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Modelcited by 556
- 2024Self-Play Fine-Tuning Converts Weak Language Models to Strong Language Modelscited by 552
- 2023Statistical Rejection Sampling Improves Preference Optimizationcited by 321
- 2018A Survey of Inverse Reinforcement Learning: Challenges, Methods and Progresscited by 294
- 2024Is DPO Superior to PPO for LLM Alignment? A Comprehensive Studycited by 262
- 2019Extrapolating Beyond Suboptimal Demonstrations via Inverse Reinforcement Learning from Observationscited by 256
- 2020Bilevel Optimization: Convergence Analysis and Enhanced Designcited by 219
- 2023AI Deception: A Survey of Examples, Risks, and Potential Solutionscited by 185
- 2015Maximum Entropy Deep Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 173
- 2021Investigating Bi-Level Optimization for Learning and Vision from a Unified Perspective: A Survey and Beyondcited by 151
- 2020A Two-Timescale Framework for Bilevel Optimization: Complexity Analysis and Application to Actor-Criticcited by 141
- 2021A Near-Optimal Algorithm for Stochastic Bilevel Optimization via Double-Momentumcited by 106
- 2024Human Alignment of Large Language Models through Online Preference Optimisationcited by 90
- 2020Learning Reward Functions from Diverse Sources of Human Feedback: Optimally Integrating Demonstrations and Preferencescited by 71
- 2019Learning Reward Functions by Integrating Human Demonstrations and Preferencescited by 64
- 2023Fine-Tuning Language Models with Advantage-Induced Policy Alignmentcited by 48
- 2022Maximum-Likelihood Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Finite-Time Guaranteescited by 42
- 2021A General Descent Aggregation Framework for Gradient-based Bi-level Optimizationcited by 28
- 2021A Bi-Level Framework for Learning to Solve Combinatorial Optimization on Graphscited by 26
- 2022Structural Estimation of Markov Decision Processes in High-Dimensional State Space with Finite-Time Guaranteescited by 12
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
4 papers.
- 2026Penalty-Based First-Order Methods for Bilevel Optimization with Minimax and Constrained Lower-Level Problemscited by 1
- 2025Nonconvex Decentralized Stochastic Bilevel Optimization under Heavy-Tailed Noisecited by 0
- 2026PHIRL: Aligning Learned Rewards with Task Progress for Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 0
- 2026Learning the Robustness Mechanism with Bilevel Optimizationcited by 0
- 2026Learning the Robustness Mechanism with Bilevel Optimization28 Sep 2026
- 2026PHIRL: Aligning Learned Rewards with Task Progress for Inverse Reinforcement Learning25 Sep 2026
- 2026Penalty-Based First-Order Methods for Bilevel Optimization with Minimax and Constrained Lower-Level Problems8 May 2026
- 2025Nonconvex Decentralized Stochastic Bilevel Optimization under Heavy-Tailed Noise19 Sep 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025From Demonstrations to Rewards: Alignment Without Explicit Human Preferences
- 2024Getting More Juice Out of the SFT Data: Reward Learning from Human Demonstration Improves SFT for LLM Alignment
- 2024Solving the Inverse Alignment Problem for Efficient RLHF
- 2025Influencing Humans to Conform to Preference Models for RLHF
- 2025Maximizing the efficiency of human feedback in AI alignment: a comparative analysis
- 2024Towards Reliable Alignment: Uncertainty-aware RLHF
- 2026Unifying Stable Optimization and Reference Regularization in RLHF
- 2024Linear Alignment: A Closed-form Solution for Aligning Human Preferences without Tuning and Feedback