mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Aligning Model Properties via Conformal Risk Control

arXiv 2406.18777 ↗First posted 26 Jun 2024cs.LG stat.MLcited by 7

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → LLM preference optimization methods

Abstract (arXiv)

AI model alignment is crucial due to inadvertent biases in training data and the underspecified machine learning pipeline, where models with excellent test metrics may not meet end-user requirements. While post-training alignment via human feedback shows promise, these methods are often limited to generative AI settings where humans can interpret and provide feedback on model outputs. In traditional non-generative settings with numerical or categorical outputs, detecting misalignment through single-sample outputs remains challenging, and enforcing alignment during training requires repeating costly training processes. In this paper we consider an alternative strategy. We propose interpreting model alignment through property testing, defining an aligned model f as one belonging to a subset P of functions that exhibit specific desired behaviors. We focus on post-processing a pre-trained model f to better align with P using conformal risk control. Specifically, we develop a general procedure for converting queries for testing a given property P to a collection of loss functions suitable for use in a conformal risk control algorithm. We prove a probabilistic guarantee that the resulting conformal interval around f contains a function approximately satisfying P. We exhibit applications of our methodology on a collection of supervised learning datasets for (shape-constrained) properties such as monotonicity and concavity. The general procedure is flexible and can be applied to a wide range of desired properties. Finally, we prove that pre-trained models will always require alignment techniques even as model sizes or training data increase, as long as the training data contains even small biases.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in LLM preference optimization methods, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 26 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jun 2024.

Builds on

26 of 49 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback4 Mar

Other references · 25

  1. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
  2. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  3. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
  4. 2021Convex optimizationcited by 2,515
  5. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,075
  6. 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 836
  7. 2021A Gentle Introduction to Conformal Prediction and Distribution-Free Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 792
  8. 2020Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learningcited by 496
  9. 2018Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research directioncited by 447
  10. 2019The generalization error of random features regression: Precise asymptotics and double descent curvecited by 413
  11. 2018AI safety via debatecited by 400
  12. 2020Fairness in Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 370
13 more
  1. 2022Conformal Risk Controlcited by 299
  2. 2021Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedbackcited by 290
  3. 2021Distribution-Free, Risk-Controlling Prediction Setscited by 288
  4. 2022The Alignment Problem from a Deep Learning Perspectivecited by 258
  5. 2018Supervising strong learners by amplifying weak expertscited by 145
  6. 2022Goal Misgeneralization: Why Correct Specifications Aren't Enough For Correct Goalscited by 126
  7. 2021Goal Misgeneralization in Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 123
  8. 2023Six Lectures on Linearized Neural Networkscited by 20
  9. 2018Monotonic classification: an overview on algorithms, performance measures and data setscited by 18
  10. 2020Deontological Ethics By Monotonicity Shape Constraintscited by 16
  11. 2021A Survey on AI Assurancecited by 16
  12. 2022Low Degree Testing over the Realscited by 3
  13. 2019Distribution-Free Testing of Linear Functions on R^ncited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 5.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Conformal Tail Risk Control for Large Language Model Alignment
  2. 2024On the Essence and Prospect: An Investigation of Alignment Approaches for Big Models
  3. 2026Conformal Feedback Alignment: Quantifying Answer-Level Reliability for Robust LLM Alignment
  4. 2025Unsupervised Conformal Inference: Bootstrapping and Alignment to Control LLM Uncertainty
  5. 2026Just Ask Jev: Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions as a Zero-Shot Detector of AI Alignment Failures
  6. 2026Alignment via Training Against Probes Without Losing Monitorability
  7. 2026Aligning Few-Step Generative Models by Amortizing Sample-based Variational Inference
  8. 2026OpenAI-HuggingFace: A Reproduction & Lessons for Alignment Testing