# Negative-Prompt-driven Alignment for Generative Language Model

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12194 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12194/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 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 25 of its 25 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Oct 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [LLM preference optimization methods](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/llm-preference-optimization-methods/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [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)
- [LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.09685/) (2021)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [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)
- [LaMDA: Language Models for Dialog Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.08239/) (2022)
- [Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gopher](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.11446/) (2021)
- [RAFT: Reward rAnked FineTuning for Generative Foundation Model Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.06767/) (2023)
- [RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tears](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05302/) (2023)
- [Principle-Driven Self-Alignment of Language Models from Scratch with Minimal Human Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03047/) (2023)
- [Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.10862/) (2021)
- [Preference Ranking Optimization for Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.17492/) (2023)
- [Prompting Large Language Model for Machine Translation: A Case Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.07069/) (2023)
- [Is Reinforcement Learning (Not) for Natural Language Processing: Benchmarks, Baselines, and Building Blocks for Natural Language Policy Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.01241/) (2022)
- [Chain of Hindsight Aligns Language Models with Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.02676/) (2023)
- [How well do Large Language Models perform in Arithmetic tasks?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.02015/) (2023)
- [On Extractive and Abstractive Neural Document Summarization with Transformer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.03186/) (2019)
- [Can Neural Machine Translation be Improved with User Feedback?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.05958/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [AI Alignment Breaks at the Edge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.20042/) (2026)
- [SAGE: Agentic Framework for Interpretable and Clinically Translatable Computational Pathology Biomarker Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.00953/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models have achieved remarkable capabilities, but aligning their outputs with human values and preferences remains a significant challenge. Existing alignment methods primarily focus on positive examples while overlooking the importance of negative responses in guiding models away from undesirable behaviors. For instance, the widely-used alignment datasets reveals a scarcity of explicit negative examples that contradict human values, hindering its ability to discourage harmful or biased outputs during training. To address this limitation, we propose NEAT, i.e., NEgative-prompt-driven AlignmenT, to introduce negative prompts to generate undesirable responses alongside positive examples during the optimization process. NEAT explicitly penalizes the model for producing harmful outputs, guiding it not only toward desirable behaviors but also steering it away from generating undesirable, biased responses. This dual feedback mechanism enables better alignment with human preferences, crucial in contexts where avoiding harm is paramount. Starting from a pre-trained language model, NEAT performs online alignment by incorporating a ranking loss derived from an expanded preference dataset containing both positive and negative examples. Extensive experiments validate NEAT's effectiveness in significantly enhancing language models' alignment with human values and preferences.