mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Averaging log-likelihoods in direct alignment

arXiv 2406.19188 ↗First posted 27 Jun 2024cs.LGcited by 5

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

Abstract (arXiv)

To better align Large Language Models (LLMs) with human judgment, Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) learns a reward model and then optimizes it using regularized RL. Recently, direct alignment methods were introduced to learn such a fine-tuned model directly from a preference dataset without computing a proxy reward function. These methods are built upon contrastive losses involving the log-likelihood of (dis)preferred completions according to the trained model. However, completions have various lengths, and the log-likelihood is not length-invariant. On the other side, the cross-entropy loss used in supervised training is length-invariant, as batches are typically averaged token-wise. To reconcile these approaches, we introduce a principled approach for making direct alignment length-invariant. Formally, we introduce a new averaging operator, to be composed with the optimality operator giving the best policy for the underlying RL problem. It translates into averaging the log-likelihood within the loss. We empirically study the effect of such averaging, observing a trade-off between the length of generations and their scores.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in LLM preference optimization methods, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 12 of its 14 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Jun 2024.

Builds on

12 of 14 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Generalized Preference Optimization: A Unified Approach to Offline Alignment8 Feb
  2. 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferences18 Oct

Other references · 10

  1. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  2. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  3. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  4. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  5. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
  6. 2023RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tearscited by 454
  7. 2023SLiC-HF: Sequence Likelihood Calibration with Human Feedbackcited by 395
  8. 2019A Theory of Regularized Markov Decision Processescited by 279
  9. 2015Taming the Noise in Reinforcement Learning via Soft Updatescited by 125
  10. 2016Sequence Tutor: Conservative Fine-Tuning of Sequence Generation Models with KL-controlcited by 100

Built on by

Cited by year

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

5 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Understanding Likelihood Over-optimisation in Direct Alignment Algorithms
  2. 2025Beyond RLHF: A Unified Theoretical Framework of Alignment
  3. 2025A Principled Loss Function for Direct Language Model Alignment
  4. 2025Towards Bridging the Reward-Generation Gap in Direct Alignment Algorithms
  5. 2024Disentangling Length from Quality in Direct Preference Optimization
  6. 2024Offline Regularised Reinforcement Learning for Large Language Models Alignment
  7. 2025AlignDistil: Token-Level Language Model Alignment as Adaptive Policy Distillation
  8. 2024Solving the Inverse Alignment Problem for Efficient RLHF