mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

DxHF: Providing High-Quality Human Feedback for LLM Alignment via Interactive Decomposition

arXiv 2507.18802 ↗First posted 24 Jul 2025cs.HC cs.AIcited by 3

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Human values and AI feedback alignment

Abstract (arXiv)

Human preferences are widely used to align large language models (LLMs) through methods such as reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). However, the current user interfaces require annotators to compare text paragraphs, which is cognitively challenging when the texts are long or unfamiliar. This paper contributes by studying the decomposition principle as an approach to improving the quality of human feedback for LLM alignment. This approach breaks down the text into individual claims instead of directly comparing two long-form text responses. Based on the principle, we build a novel user interface DxHF. It enhances the comparison process by showing decomposed claims, visually encoding the relevance of claims to the conversation and linking similar claims. This allows users to skim through key information and identify differences for better and quicker judgment. Our technical evaluation shows evidence that decomposition generally improves feedback accuracy regarding the ground truth, particularly for users with uncertainty. A crowdsourcing study with 160 participants indicates that using DxHF improves feedback accuracy by an average of 5%, although it increases the average feedback time by 18 seconds. Notably, accuracy is significantly higher in situations where users have less certainty. The finding of the study highlights the potential of HCI as an effective method for improving human-AI alignment.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 33 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jul 2025.

Builds on

33 of 67 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Who Validates the Validators? Aligning LLM-Assisted Evaluation of LLM Outputs with Human Preferences18 Apr
  2. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedback2 Sep

Other references · 31

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  3. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  4. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  5. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  6. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  7. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
  8. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  9. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  10. 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
  11. 2023FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generationcited by 1,282
  12. 2021A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignmentcited by 1,055
19 more
  1. 2022Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samplescited by 752
  2. 2018Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research directioncited by 447
  3. 2024Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biasescited by 323
  4. 2024Disentangling Length from Quality in Direct Preference Optimizationcited by 196
  5. 2023ChainForge: A Visual Toolkit for Prompt Engineering and LLM Hypothesis Testingcited by 88
  6. 2023EvalLM: Interactive Evaluation of Large Language Model Prompts on User-Defined Criteriacited by 74
  7. 2022Generating Scientific Claims for Zero-Shot Scientific Fact Checkingcited by 59
  8. 2020Generating Fact Checking Briefscited by 50
  9. 2024Can AI writing be salvaged? Mitigating Idiosyncrasies and Improving Human-AI Alignment in the Writing Process through Editscited by 49
  10. 2022The Boltzmann Policy Distribution: Accounting for Systematic Suboptimality in Human Modelscited by 31
  11. 2024LLM Comparator: Visual Analytics for Side-by-Side Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 29
  12. 2024Supporting Sensemaking of Large Language Model Outputs at Scalecited by 27
  13. 2023RELIC: Investigating Large Language Model Responses using Self-Consistencycited by 23
  14. 2023RLHF-Blender: A Configurable Interactive Interface for Learning from Diverse Human Feedbackcited by 15
  15. 2024An AI-Resilient Text Rendering Technique for Reading and Skimming Documentscited by 11
  16. 2025Reward Learning from Multiple Feedback Typescited by 9
  17. 2024Supporting Co-Adaptive Machine Teaching through Human Concept Learning and Cognitive Theoriescited by 4
  18. 2025Interactive Groupwise Comparison for Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 4
  19. 2024Eye Tracking on Text Reading with Visual Enhancementscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Data-Efficient Alignment of Large Language Models with Human Feedback Through Natural Language
  2. 2025RLTHF: Targeted Human Feedback for LLM Alignment
  3. 2023Peering Through Preferences: Unraveling Feedback Acquisition for Aligning Large Language Models
  4. 2024Your Weak LLM is Secretly a Strong Teacher for Alignment
  5. 2023CycleAlign: Iterative Distillation from Black-box LLM to White-box Models for Better Human Alignment
  6. 2026Reliability-Aware LLM Alignment from Inconsistent Human Feedback
  7. 2023Aligning Large Language Models with Human: A Survey
  8. 2023Reasons to Reject? Aligning Language Models with Judgments