mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Strong Preferences Affect the Robustness of Preference Models and Value Alignment

arXiv 2410.02451 ↗First posted 3 Oct 2024cs.AIcited by 4

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Value alignment, which aims to ensure that large language models (LLMs) and other AI agents behave in accordance with human values, is critical for ensuring safety and trustworthiness of these systems. A key component of value alignment is the modeling of human preferences as a representation of human values. In this paper, we investigate the robustness of value alignment by examining the sensitivity of preference models. Specifically, we ask: how do changes in the probabilities of some preferences affect the predictions of these models for other preferences? To answer this question, we theoretically analyze the robustness of widely used preference models by examining their sensitivities to minor changes in preferences they model. Our findings reveal that, in the Bradley-Terry and the Placket-Luce model, the probability of a preference can change significantly as other preferences change, especially when these preferences are dominant (i.e., with probabilities near 0 or 1). We identify specific conditions where this sensitivity becomes significant for these models and discuss the practical implications for the robustness and safety of value alignment in AI systems.

Key facts. Cited by 4 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 21 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Oct 2024.

Builds on

21 of 35 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preference7 Mar
  2. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedback2 Sep

Other references · 19

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  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. 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferencescited by 906
  6. 2023RAFT: Reward rAnked FineTuning for Generative Foundation Model Alignmentcited by 672
  7. 2023Zephyr: Direct Distillation of LM Alignmentcited by 498
  8. 2024Contrastive Preference Optimization: Pushing the Boundaries of LLM Performance in Machine Translationcited by 390
  9. 2023Statistical Rejection Sampling Improves Preference Optimizationcited by 321
  10. 2023Preference Ranking Optimization for Human Alignmentcited by 283
  11. 2023AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 256
  12. 2023Nash Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 220
7 more
  1. 2023Helping or Herding? Reward Model Ensembles Mitigate but do not Eliminate Reward Hackingcited by 195
  2. 2024Foundational Challenges in Assuring Alignment and Safety of Large Language Modelscited by 193
  3. 2024Preference Fine-Tuning of LLMs Should Leverage Suboptimal, On-Policy Datacited by 184
  4. 2024Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization in Direct Alignment Algorithmscited by 139
  5. 2023TrustGPT: A Benchmark for Trustworthy and Responsible Large Language Modelscited by 56
  6. 2021The Challenge of Value Alignment: from Fairer Algorithms to AI Safetycited by 34
  7. 2023Denevil: Towards Deciphering and Navigating the Ethical Values of Large Language Models via Instruction Learningcited by 26

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Distortion of AI Alignment: Does Preference Optimization Optimize for Preferences?
  2. 2024Beyond Preferences in AI Alignment
  3. 2026Toward a Theory of Value in AI Alignment
  4. 2025Deep Value Benchmark: Measuring Whether Models Generalize Deep Values or Shallow Preferences
  5. 2025Preference Learning for AI Alignment: a Causal Perspective
  6. 2026Are Human-Aligned Models Models of Humans? A Turing-Test Gap in Preference Alignment
  7. 2024Understanding the Learning Dynamics of Alignment with Human Feedback
  8. 2025Robust Preference Alignment via Directional Neighborhood Consensus