mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Practical Analysis of Human Alignment with *PO

arXiv 2407.15229 ↗First posted 21 Jul 2024cs.CL cs.AIcited by 7

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

Abstract (arXiv)

At the forefront of state-of-the-art human alignment methods are preference optimization methods (*PO). Prior research has often concentrated on identifying the best-performing method, typically involving a grid search over hyperparameters, which can be impractical for general practitioners. In this paper, we examine the robustness of existing state-of-the-art methods to varying hyperparameters in a realistic out-of-distribution (OOD) scenario that mirrors real-world applications of human alignment. Our goal is to empirically find the method that increases the likelihood of achieving better results through the lens of various metrics, such as KL divergence and response length. We also introduce LN-DPO, a simple length-normalized version of DPO that is more stable across hyperparameters, effectively reduces the average response length, and improves performance. Our analysis of state-of-the-art reference-free (i.e., SimPO) and reference-dependent (i.e., DPO and LN-DPO) methods reveals that they perform similarly at their peak (i.e., best possible scenario). However, we uncover that the pattern of change in performance greatly varies as we move away from the best possible scenario.

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 29 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jul 2024.

Builds on

29 of 41 references.

Closest ancestors · 9

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Unpacking DPO and PPO: Disentangling Best Practices for Learning from Preference Feedback13 Jun
  2. 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward23 May
  3. 2024Is DPO Superior to PPO for LLM Alignment? A Comprehensive Study16 Apr
  4. 2024Disentangling Length from Quality in Direct Preference Optimization28 Mar
  5. 2024Generalized Preference Optimization: A Unified Approach to Offline Alignment8 Feb
  6. 2024Contrastive Preference Optimization: Pushing the Boundaries of LLM Performance in Machine Translation16 Jan
  7. 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferences18 Oct
  8. 2023OpenAssistant Conversations -- Democratizing Large Language Model Alignment14 Apr
  9. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback4 Mar

Other references · 20

  1. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  3. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
  4. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  5. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
  6. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,789
  7. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 3,050
  8. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
  9. 2024Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phonecited by 1,917
  10. 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,255
  11. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
  12. 2024The FineWeb Datasets: Decanting the Web for the Finest Text Data at Scalecited by 1,160
8 more
  1. 2022Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimizationcited by 1,095
  2. 2023Safe RLHF: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 656
  3. 2024LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction Tuningcited by 532
  4. 2024Interpretable Preferences via Multi-Objective Reward Modeling and Mixture-of-Expertscited by 376
  5. 2024Direct Nash Optimization: Teaching Language Models to Self-Improve with General Preferencescited by 178
  6. 2024ODIN: Disentangled Reward Mitigates Hacking in RLHFcited by 136
  7. 2022RL with KL penalties is better viewed as Bayesian inferencecited by 135
  8. 2024The N+ Implementation Details of RLHF with PPO: A Case Study on TL;DR Summarizationcited by 50

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Curry-DPO: Enhancing Alignment using Curriculum Learning & Ranked Preferences
  2. 2026A Statistical Framework for Alignment with Biased AI Feedback
  3. 2024Holistic Utility Preference Learning for Listwise Alignment
  4. 2023Preference Ranking Optimization for Human Alignment
  5. 2025Multi-Objective Preference Optimization: Improving Human Alignment of Generative Models
  6. 2025HPS: Hard Preference Sampling for Human Preference Alignment
  7. 2025ComPO: Preference Alignment via Comparison Oracles
  8. 2025AlphaPO: Reward Shape Matters for LLM Alignment