mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

As Simple as Fine-tuning: LLM Alignment via Bidirectional Negative Feedback Loss

arXiv 2410.04834 ↗First posted 7 Oct 2024cs.CLcited by 6

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has emerged as a more computationally efficient alternative to Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) with Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), eliminating the need for reward models and online sampling. Despite these benefits, DPO and its variants remain sensitive to hyper-parameters and prone to instability, particularly on mathematical datasets. We argue that these issues arise from the unidirectional likelihood-derivative negative feedback inherent in the log-likelihood loss function. To address this, we propose a novel LLM alignment loss that establishes a stable Bidirectional Negative Feedback (BNF) during optimization. Our proposed BNF loss eliminates the need for pairwise contrastive losses and does not require any extra tunable hyper-parameters or pairwise preference data, streamlining the alignment pipeline to be as simple as supervised fine-tuning. We conduct extensive experiments across two challenging QA benchmarks and four reasoning benchmarks. The experimental results show that BNF achieves comparable performance to the best methods on QA benchmarks, while its performance decrease on the four reasoning benchmarks is significantly lower compared to the best methods, thus striking a better balance between value alignment and reasoning ability. In addition, we further validate the performance of BNF on non-pairwise datasets, and conduct in-depth analysis of log-likelihood and logit shifts across different preference optimization methods.

Key facts. Cited by 6 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 34 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2024.

Builds on

34 of 39 references.

Closest ancestors · 9

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward23 May
  2. 2024Insights into Alignment: Evaluating DPO and its Variants Across Multiple Tasks23 Apr
  3. 2024Is DPO Superior to PPO for LLM Alignment? A Comprehensive Study16 Apr
  4. 2024Disentangling Length from Quality in Direct Preference Optimization28 Mar
  5. 2024Smaug: Fixing Failure Modes of Preference Optimisation with DPO-Positive20 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. 2023Mitigating the Alignment Tax of RLHF12 Sep
  9. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback4 Mar

Other references · 25

  1. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  3. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  4. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  5. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  6. 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
  7. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  8. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
  9. 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Codecited by 2,139
  10. 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
  11. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,184
  12. 2023Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotationscited by 928
13 more
  1. 2024Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluatorscited by 897
  2. 2023Open Problems and Fundamental Limitations of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 759
  3. 2023LLM-Blender: Ensembling Large Language Models with Pairwise Ranking and Generative Fusioncited by 564
  4. 2024From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipelinecited by 500
  5. 2023Benchmarking Large Language Models for News Summarizationcited by 445
  6. 2023UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedbackcited by 406
  7. 2023SLiC-HF: Sequence Likelihood Calibration with Human Feedbackcited by 401
  8. 2024Interpretable Preferences via Multi-Objective Reward Modeling and Mixture-of-Expertscited by 376
  9. 2024CRUXEval: A Benchmark for Code Reasoning, Understanding and Executioncited by 300
  10. 2024WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wildcited by 218
  11. 2024Are We Done with MMLU?cited by 194
  12. 2024Nemotron-4 340B Technical Reportcited by 144
  13. 2024RLHF Deciphered: A Critical Analysis of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback for LLMscited by 90

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

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

6 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Conditional Equivalence of DPO and RLHF: Implicit Assumption, Failure Modes, and Provable Alignment
  2. 2025Why DPO is a Misspecified Estimator and How to Fix It
  3. 2024Minor DPO reject penalty to increase training robustness
  4. 2024Triple Preference Optimization: Achieving Better Alignment using a Single Step Optimization
  5. 2025Direct Preference Optimization with Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity: The Necessity of Ternary Preferences
  6. 2024Direct Preference Optimization With Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity: The Necessity of Ternary Preferences
  7. 2025Uni-DPO: A Unified Paradigm for Dynamic Preference Optimization of LLMs
  8. 2024A Comprehensive Survey of Direct Preference Optimization: Datasets, Theories, Variants, and Applications