mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

DRIFT: Learning from Abundant User Dissatisfaction in Real-World Preference Learning

arXiv 2510.02341 ↗First posted 27 Sep 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 5

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Real-world large language model deployments (e.g., conversational AI systems, code generation assistants) naturally generate abundant implicit user dissatisfaction (DSAT) signals, as users iterate toward better answers through refinements, corrections, and expressed preferences, while explicit satisfaction (SAT) feedback is scarce. Existing preference learning approaches are poorly aligned with this data profile, as they rely on costly human annotations or assume plentiful positive responses. In this paper, we introduce DRIFT (Dissatisfaction-Refined Iterative preFerence Training), which anchors training on real-world DSAT signals and samples positives dynamically from the evolving policy. Empirically, DRIFT models trained on real-world textitWildFeedback datasets and synthetic textitUltraFeedback datasets achieve up to +6.23% (7B) / +7.61% (14B) on WildBench Task Score and up to +8.95% (7B) / +12.29% (14B) on AlpacaEval2 win rate over base models, outperforming strong baseline methods such as iterative DPO and SPIN. At larger scales, the improvements are particularly pronounced: 14B models trained with DRIFT surpass GPT-4o-mini on WildBench. Further analysis shows that DRIFT also preserves exploratory capacity, yielding more diverse high-reward solutions rather than collapsing to narrow subsets. Theoretically, we demonstrate that this design preserves preference margins and avoids the gradient degeneration. These results show that DRIFT is an effective and scalable recipe for real-world post-training that leverages the most abundant and informative signal. The code and data are available at https://github.com/cacayaya/DRIFT.git.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 23 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Sep 2025.

Builds on

23 of 31 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Aligning Large Language Models with Implicit Preferences from User-Generated Content4 Jun
  2. 2024WildFeedback: Aligning LLMs With In-situ User Interactions And Feedback28 Aug
  3. 2024Naturally Occurring Feedback is Common, Extractable and Useful15 Jul
  4. 2024Aligning LLM Agents by Learning Latent Preference from User Edits23 Apr

Other references · 19

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  3. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  4. 2024Self-Rewarding Language Modelscited by 654
  5. 2024Self-Play Fine-Tuning Converts Weak Language Models to Strong Language Modelscited by 552
  6. 2023LMSYS-Chat-1M: A Large-Scale Real-World LLM Conversation Datasetcited by 449
  7. 2023Iterative Preference Learning from Human Feedback: Bridging Theory and Practice for RLHF under KL-Constraintcited by 346
  8. 2024MT-Bench-101: A Fine-Grained Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Multi-Turn Dialoguescited by 247
  9. 2024WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wildcited by 211
  10. 2019Learning from Dialogue after Deployment: Feed Yourself, Chatbot!cited by 102
  11. 2024Bootstrapping Language Models with DPO Implicit Rewardscited by 53
  12. 2025Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Iterative DPO: A Comprehensive Empirical Investigationcited by 36
7 more
  1. 2024CREAM: Consistency Regularized Self-Rewarding Language Modelscited by 35
  2. 2024Aligning Language Models with Demonstrated Feedbackcited by 32
  3. 2024Interpretable User Satisfaction Estimation for Conversational Systems with Large Language Modelscited by 19
  4. 2025User Feedback in Human-LLM Dialogues: A Lens to Understand Users But Noisy as a Learning Signalcited by 19
  5. 2025More is Less: The Pitfalls of Multi-Model Synthetic Preference Data in DPO Safety Alignmentcited by 5
  6. 2025Temporal Self-Rewarding Language Models: Decoupling Chosen-Rejected via Past-Futurecited by 5
  7. 2024Learning to Reason via Self-Iterative Process Feedback for Small Language Modelscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 4.

5 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Drift: Decoding-time Personalized Alignments with Implicit User Preferences
  2. 2025IPO: Your Language Model is Secretly a Preference Classifier
  3. 2024A Systematic Examination of Preference Learning through the Lens of Instruction-Following
  4. 2024Optimizing Language Models for Human Preferences is a Causal Inference Problem
  5. 2025Clear Preferences Leave Traces: Reference Model-Guided Sampling for Preference Learning
  6. 2026ImplicitRM: Unbiased Reward Modeling from Implicit Preference Data for LLM alignment
  7. 2024Aligning Language Models Using Follow-up Likelihood as Reward Signal
  8. 2024A Survey on Human Preference Learning for Large Language Models