# Larger or Smaller Reward Margins to Select Preferences for Alignment?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.01864 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.01864/

## Key facts

- Cited by 11 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 49 of its 55 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Feb 2025.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 49)

- [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)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [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)
- [Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10560/) (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)
- [Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Size](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00118/) (2024)
- [WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.09332/) (2021)
- [WizardLM: Empowering large pre-trained language models to follow complex instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.12244/) (2023)
- [Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10760/) (2022)
- [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)
- [Open Problems and Fundamental Limitations of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15217/) (2023)
- [RAFT: Reward rAnked FineTuning for Generative Foundation Model Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.06767/) (2023)
- [Self-Rewarding Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10020/) (2024)
- [Self-Play Fine-Tuning Converts Weak Language Models to Strong Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.01335/) (2024)
- [From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11939/) (2024)
- [RRHF: Rank Responses to Align Language Models with Human Feedback without tears](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05302/) (2023)
- [UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01377/) (2023)
- [Interpretable Preferences via Multi-Objective Reward Modeling and Mixture-of-Experts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12845/) (2024)
- [What Makes Good Data for Alignment? A Comprehensive Study of Automatic Data Selection in Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.15685/) (2023)
- [Iterative Preference Learning from Human Feedback: Bridging Theory and Practice for RLHF under KL-Constraint](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.11456/) (2023)
- [Magpie: Alignment Data Synthesis from Scratch by Prompting Aligned LLMs with Nothing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.08464/) (2024)
- [Statistical Rejection Sampling Improves Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06657/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Robust Preference Optimization via Dynamic Target Margins](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.03690/) (2025)
- [On the Direction of RLVR Updates for LLM Reasoning: Identification and Exploitation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.22117/) (2026)
- [Towards Understanding Valuable Preference Data for Large Language Model Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.13212/) (2025)
- [Revisiting Robustness for LLM Safety Alignment via Selective Geometry Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.07340/) (2026)
- [Alignment through Meta-Weighted Online Sampling: Bridging the Gap between Data Generation and Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.23371/) (2025)
- [Small-Margin Preferences Still Matter-If You Train Them Right](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.00954/) (2026)
- [A Component-Based Survey of Interactions between Large Language Models and Multi-Armed Bandits](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.12945/) (2026)
- [Alignment Tuning for Large Language Models: A Data-Centric Lens on Alignment Data Pipelines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.26442/) (2026)
- [Smaller Models, Better Rejects: Preference Distillation Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.38987/) (2026)
- [Intrinsic Mutual Information as a Modulator for Preference Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.24804/) (2026)
- [AlignDiff: Exploiting Model-Intrinsic Information for Better Preference Data Selection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.05899/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Preference learning is critical for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values, with the quality of preference datasets playing a crucial role in this process. While existing metrics primarily assess data quality based on either explicit or implicit reward margins, they often provide contradictory evaluations for the same data. To address this issue, we introduce the alignment potential metric, which quantifies the gap from the model's current implicit reward margin to the target explicit reward margin, thereby estimating the model's potential to align with the preference data. Empirical results demonstrate that training on data selected by this metric consistently enhances alignment performance, surpassing existing metrics across different base models and optimization objectives. Furthermore, our method extends to self-play data generation frameworks, where the metric is used to identify high-quality data within the self-generated content by LLMs. Under this data generation scenario, our method surpasses current state-of-the-art (SOTA) results across various training settings and demonstrates continuous improvements in alignment performance as dataset size and training iterations increase.