# Reward-Augmented Data Enhances Direct Preference Alignment of LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.08067 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.08067/

## Key facts

- Cited by 10 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 66 of its 82 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Oct 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [LLM preference optimization methods](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/llm-preference-optimization-methods/)
- LLM safety and security / [Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails](https://mlsanity.com/safety/safety-alignment-refusal-and-guardrails/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 66)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [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)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Mistral 7B](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06825/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Qwen2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.10671/) (2024)
- [Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Size](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00118/) (2024)
- [Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09261/) (2022)
- [Decision Transformer: Reinforcement Learning via Sequence Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01345/) (2021)
- [A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.00861/) (2021)
- [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)
- [Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04475/) (2024)
- [RAFT: Reward rAnked FineTuning for Generative Foundation Model Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.06767/) (2023)
- [LLM-Blender: Ensembling Large Language Models with Pairwise Ranking and Generative Fusion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.02561/) (2023)
- [ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07691/) (2024)
- [Zephyr: Direct Distillation of LM Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16944/) (2023)
- [Reinforced Self-Training (ReST) for Language Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.08998/) (2023)
- [From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11939/) (2024)
- [RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.13787/) (2024)
- [RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tears](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05302/) (2023)
- [Scaling Relationship on Learning Mathematical Reasoning with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.01825/) (2023)
- [How Far Can Camels Go? Exploring the State of Instruction Tuning on Open Resources](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.04751/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [ComPO: Preference Alignment via Comparison Oracles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.05465/) (2025)
- [DSTC: Direct Preference Learning with Only Self-Generated Tests and Code to Improve Code LMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.13611/) (2024)
- [Less is More: Improving LLM Alignment via Preference Data Selection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14560/) (2025)
- [Alignment through Meta-Weighted Online Sampling: Bridging the Gap between Data Generation and Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.23371/) (2025)
- [Alignment Data Map for Efficient Preference Data Selection and Diagnosis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23114/) (2025)
- [Direct Preference Optimization with Rating Information: Practical Algorithms and Provable Gains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.00603/) (2026)
- [CompassDPO: Dynamics-Controlled Direct Preference Optimization for Robust Safety Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.07211/) (2026)
- [Multi-Objective Reward and Preference Optimization: Theory and Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.10601/) (2025)
- [Children's English Reading Story Generation via Supervised Fine-Tuning of Compact LLMs with Controllable Difficulty and Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.13709/) (2026)
- [A Zeroth-Order Paradigm for LLM Preference Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.19144/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Preference alignment in Large Language Models (LLMs) has significantly improved their ability to adhere to human instructions and intentions. However, existing direct alignment algorithms primarily focus on relative preferences and often overlook the qualitative aspects of responses, despite having access to preference data that includes reward scores from judge models during AI feedback. Striving to maximize the implicit reward gap between the chosen and the slightly inferior rejected responses can cause overfitting and unnecessary unlearning of the high-quality rejected responses. The unawareness of the reward scores also drives the LLM to indiscriminately favor the low-quality chosen responses and fail to generalize to optimal responses that are sparse in data. To overcome these shortcomings, our study introduces reward-conditioned LLM policies that discern and learn from the entire spectrum of response quality within the dataset, helping extrapolate to more optimal regions. We propose an effective yet simple data relabeling method that conditions the preference pairs on quality scores to construct a reward-augmented dataset. The experiments across various benchmarks and diverse models demonstrate that our approach consistently boosts DPO by a considerable margin. Through comprehensive ablation studies, we demonstrate that our method not only maximizes the utility of preference data but also mitigates the issue of unlearning, demonstrating its broad effectiveness beyond mere data expansion. Our code is available at https://github.com/shenao-zhang/reward-augmented-preference.