mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

SparsePO: Controlling Preference Alignment of LLMs via Sparse Token Masks

arXiv 2410.05102 ↗First posted 7 Oct 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 9

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Direct alignment algorithms have proven an effective step for aligning language models to human-desired behaviors. Current variants of the Direct Preference Optimization objective have focused on a strict setting where all tokens are contributing signals of KL divergence and rewards to the loss function. However, human preference is not affected equally by each word in a sequence but is often dependent on specific words or phrases, e.g. existence of toxic terms leads to non-preferred responses. Based on this observation, we argue that not all tokens should be weighted equally during PO and propose a flexible objective termed SparsePO, that aims to automatically learn to weight the KL divergence and reward corresponding to each token during PO training. We propose two different variants of weight-masks that can either be derived from the reference model itself or learned on the fly. Notably, our method induces sparsity in the learned masks, allowing the model to learn how to best balance reward and KL divergence contributions at the token level, learning an optimal level of mask sparsity. Extensive experiments illustrate the effectiveness of our approach at aligning to preference proxies, including sentiment control, helpfulness and harmlessness, and summary quality. Our method obtains +10% and +3% win rate points in summarization and dialogue scenarios, respectively, without compromising model reasoning or the relevancy and faithfulness of the summary response.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in LLM preference optimization methods, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 36 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2024.

Builds on

36 of 53 references.

Closest ancestors · 10

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024TIS-DPO: Token-level Importance Sampling for Direct Preference Optimization With Estimated Weights6 Oct
  2. 2024Selective Preference Optimization via Token-Level Reward Function Estimation24 Aug
  3. 2024β-DPO: Direct Preference Optimization with Dynamic β11 Jul
  4. 2024Magpie: Alignment Data Synthesis from Scratch by Prompting Aligned LLMs with Nothing12 Jun
  5. 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward23 May
  6. 2024Token-level Direct Preference Optimization18 Apr
  7. 2024ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Model12 Mar
  8. 2024Smaug: Fixing Failure Modes of Preference Optimisation with DPO-Positive20 Feb
  9. 2024Direct Preference Optimization with an Offset16 Feb
  10. 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferences18 Oct

Other references · 26

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  2. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  3. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  4. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  5. 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
  6. 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
  7. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
  8. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  9. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  10. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  11. 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,355
  12. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
14 more
  1. 2019Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferencescited by 2,124
  2. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
  3. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,359
  4. 2023StarCoder: may the source be with you!cited by 790
  5. 2023An Empirical Study of Catastrophic Forgetting in Large Language Models During Continual Fine-tuningcited by 622
  6. 2018Texygen: A Benchmarking Platform for Text Generation Modelscited by 484
  7. 2021SummaC: Re-Visiting NLI-based Models for Inconsistency Detection in Summarizationcited by 402
  8. 2024Rho-1: Not All Tokens Are What You Needcited by 132
  9. 2024TLCR: Token-Level Continuous Reward for Fine-grained Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 43
  10. 2022mFACE: Multilingual Summarization with Factual Consistency Evaluationcited by 42
  11. 2022A Well-Composed Text is Half Done! Composition Sampling for Diverse Conditional Generationcited by 28
  12. 2024Code-Optimise: Self-Generated Preference Data for Correctness and Efficiencycited by 16
  13. 2024Inverse-Q*: Token Level Reinforcement Learning for Aligning Large Language Models Without Preference Datacited by 12
  14. 2024HumanRankEval: Automatic Evaluation of LMs as Conversational Assistantscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 6.

9 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Constrain Alignment with Sparse Autoencoders
  2. 2024Cal-DPO: Calibrated Direct Preference Optimization for Language Model Alignment
  3. 2026When Weak LLMs Speak with Confidence, Preference Alignment Gets Stronger
  4. 2026Private Direct Preference Optimization for LLM Alignment
  5. 2026GAW-PO: Preference Optimization with Gradient-Aligned Token Weights
  6. 2024Towards Improved Preference Optimization Pipeline: from Data Generation to Budget-Controlled Regularization
  7. 2025SparseRM: A Lightweight Preference Modeling with Sparse Autoencoder
  8. 2024Reward-Augmented Data Enhances Direct Preference Alignment of LLMs