# Challenges and Future Directions of Data-Centric AI Alignment

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.01957 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.01957/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation.
- Builds on 73 of its 96 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [Human values and AI feedback alignment](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/human-values-and-ai-feedback-alignment/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 73)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03741/) (2017)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.08593/) (2019)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14734/) (2024)
- [A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12036/) (2023)
- [Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09251/) (2022)
- [Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17548/) (2023)
- [Open Problems and Fundamental Limitations of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15217/) (2023)
- [LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13076/) (2024)
- [Safe RLHF: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12773/) (2023)
- [RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00267/) (2023)
- [RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tears](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05302/) (2023)
- [Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research direction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.07871/) (2018)
- [UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01377/) (2023)
- [SLiC-HF: Sequence Likelihood Calibration with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10425/) (2023)
- [Interpretable Preferences via Multi-Objective Reward Modeling and Mixture-of-Experts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12845/) (2024)
- [Hallucination is Inevitable: An Innate Limitation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.11817/) (2024)
- [Statistical Rejection Sampling Improves Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06657/) (2023)
- [From Quantity to Quality: Boosting LLM Performance with Self-Guided Data Selection for Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.12032/) (2023)
- [PEBBLE: Feedback-Efficient Interactive Reinforcement Learning via Relabeling Experience and Unsupervised Pre-training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.05091/) (2021)
- [Unsolved Problems in ML Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.13916/) (2021)
- [Preference Ranking Optimization for Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.17492/) (2023)
- [Judging the Judges: A Systematic Study of Position Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07791/) (2024)
- [AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.19852/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Process Reward Model with Q-Value Rankings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.11287/) (2024)
- [Visual Instruction Bottleneck Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13946/) (2025)
- [Clean First, Align Later: Benchmarking Preference Data Cleaning for Reliable LLM Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.23564/) (2025)
- [Limited Preference Data? Learning Better Reward Model with Latent Space Synthesis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.26074/) (2025)
- [General Exploratory Bonus for Optimistic Exploration in RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.03269/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As AI systems become increasingly capable and influential, ensuring their alignment with human values, preferences, and goals has become a critical research focus. Current alignment methods primarily focus on designing algorithms and loss functions but often underestimate the crucial role of data. This paper advocates for a shift towards data-centric AI alignment, emphasizing the need to enhance the quality and representativeness of data used in aligning AI systems. In this position paper, we highlight key challenges associated with both human-based and AI-based feedback within the data-centric alignment framework. Through qualitative analysis, we identify multiple sources of unreliability in human feedback, as well as problems related to temporal drift, context dependence, and AI-based feedback failing to capture human values due to inherent model limitations. We propose future research directions, including improved feedback collection practices, robust data-cleaning methodologies, and rigorous feedback verification processes. We call for future research into these critical directions to ensure, addressing gaps that persist in understanding and improving data-centric alignment practices.