mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Fellowship of the LLMs: Multi-Model Workflows for Synthetic Preference Optimization Dataset Generation

arXiv 2408.08688 ↗First posted 16 Aug 2024cs.CL cs.AIcited by 11

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Human values and AI feedback alignment

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper presents a novel methodology for generating synthetic Preference Optimization (PO) datasets using multi-model workflows. We evaluate the effectiveness and potential of these workflows in automating and enhancing the dataset generation process. PO dataset generation requires two modules: (1) textitresponse evaluation, and (2) textitresponse generation. In the textitresponse evaluation module, the responses from Large Language Models (LLMs) are evaluated and ranked - a task typically carried out by human annotators that we automate using LLMs. We assess the response evaluation module in a 2 step process. In step 1, we assess LLMs as evaluators using three distinct prompting strategies. In step 2, we apply the winning prompting strategy to compare the performance of LLM-as-a-Judge, LLMs-as-a-Jury, and LLM Debate. Our evaluation shows that GPT-4o-as-a-Judge is more consistent across all datasets. For the textitresponse generation module, we use the identified LLM evaluator configuration and compare different configurations of the LLM Feedback Loop. We use the win rate to determine the best multi-model configuration for generation. Experimenting with various configurations, we find that the LLM Feedback Loop, with Llama as the generator and Gemma as the reviewer, achieves a notable 71.8% and 73.8% win rate over single-model Llama and Gemma, respectively. After identifying the best configurations for both modules, we generate our PO datasets using the above pipeline.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 13 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Aug 2024.

Builds on

13 of 40 references.

References · 13

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  2. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  3. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  4. 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,739
  5. 2023Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluatorscited by 1,050
  6. 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 995
  7. 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 724
  8. 2020KILT: a Benchmark for Knowledge Intensive Language Taskscited by 571
  9. 2024ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Modelcited by 556
  10. 2024From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipelinecited by 484
  11. 2023PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimizationcited by 311
  12. 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 301
1 more
  1. 2021Understanding the Capabilities, Limitations, and Societal Impact of Large Language Modelscited by 159

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

11 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Direct Judgement Preference Optimization
  2. 2024Optimizing LLMs with Direct Preferences: A Data Efficiency Perspective
  3. 2025Multi-Sample Prompting and Actor-Critic Prompt Optimization for Diverse Synthetic Data Generation
  4. 2025AutoSynth: Automated Workflow Optimization for High-Quality Synthetic Dataset Generation via Monte Carlo Tree Search
  5. 2025RoSE: Round-robin Synthetic Data Evaluation for Selecting LLM Generators without Human Test Sets
  6. 2025How Humans Help LLMs: Assessing and Incentivizing Human Preference Annotators
  7. 2026Evaluating LLM-Generated Preference Distributions
  8. 2024Multi-Response Preference Optimization with Augmented Ranking Dataset