# When Distance Distracts: Representation Distance Bias in BT-Loss for Reward Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.06343 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.06343/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reward modeling and RLHF, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation.
- Builds on 37 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 6 Dec 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [Reward modeling and RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/reward-modeling-and-rlhf/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 37)

- [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)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Layer Normalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1607.06450/) (2016)
- [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)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [HuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.03771/) (2019)
- [Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.08593/) (2019)
- [Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10760/) (2022)
- [SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14734/) (2024)
- [Generative Verifiers: Reward Modeling as Next-Token Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.15240/) (2024)
- [UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01377/) (2023)
- [Fine-Grained Human Feedback Gives Better Rewards for Language Model Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.01693/) (2023)
- [Interpretable Preferences via Multi-Objective Reward Modeling and Mixture-of-Experts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12845/) (2024)
- [Skywork-Reward: Bag of Tricks for Reward Modeling in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.18451/) (2024)
- [Reward Model Ensembles Help Mitigate Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.02743/) (2023)
- [Skywork-Reward-V2: Scaling Preference Data Curation via Human-AI Synergy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.01352/) (2025)
- [RM-Bench: Benchmarking Reward Models of Language Models with Subtlety and Style](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.16184/) (2024)
- [RM-R1: Reward Modeling as Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.02387/) (2025)
- [Regularizing Hidden States Enables Learning Generalizable Reward Model for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10216/) (2024)
- [HelpSteer2-Preference: Complementing Ratings with Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.01257/) (2024)
- [Taming Overconfidence in LLMs: Reward Calibration in RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09724/) (2024)
- [How to Evaluate Reward Models for RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.14872/) (2024)
- [What Makes a Reward Model a Good Teacher? An Optimization Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.15477/) (2025)
- [Quantile Regression for Distributional Reward Models in RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.10164/) (2024)
- [A Comprehensive Survey of Reward Models: Taxonomy, Applications, Challenges, and Future](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.12328/) (2025)
- [When to Trust LLMs: Aligning Confidence with Response Quality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.17287/) (2024)
- [Post-hoc Reward Calibration: A Case Study on Length Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.17407/) (2024)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Process Reward Model for Generalizable Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14361/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [From Soft Targets to Reward Signals: How Assignment and Reward Objectives Interact](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.34850/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Reward models are central to Large Language Model (LLM) alignment within the framework of RLHF. The standard objective used in reward modeling is the Bradley-Terry (BT) loss, which learns from pairwise data consisting of chosen and rejected responses. In this work, we analyze the per-sample gradient of BT-loss and show spurious learning signals due to representation distance. In particular, BT gradient norm scales with two distinct components: (1) prediction error, reflected by the difference in predicted rewards between chosen and rejected responses, and critically, (2) representation distance between the pair measured in the output space of the final layer. While the first term captures the intended training signal, the second term can significantly impact the update magnitude and misalign learning. Specifically, pairs with small representation distance often receive vanishingly weak updates, even when misranked, while pairs with large distance receive disproportionately strong updates. This leads to gradients from large-distance pairs to overshadow those from small-distance pairs, where fine-grained distinctions are especially important. To overcome this limitation, we propose NormBT, an adaptive pair-wise normalization scheme that rescales updates to balance representation-driven effects and focuses learning signals on prediction error. NormBT is a lightweight, drop-in modification to BT loss with negligible overhead. Across various LLM backbones and datasets, NormBT improves reward model performance consistently, with notable gains of over 5% on the Reasoning category of RewardBench, which contains numerous fine-grained pairs.