# Mitigating Mismatch within Reference-based Preference Optimization

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.11902 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.11902/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 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 64 of its 80 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2026.

## 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 64)

- [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)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06180/) (2023)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07830/) (2019)
- [Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03741/) (2017)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [FlashAttention-2: Faster Attention with Better Parallelism and Work Partitioning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.08691/) (2023)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [Trust Region Policy Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1502.05477/) (2015)
- [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)
- [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)
- [Enhancing Chat Language Models by Scaling High-quality Instructional Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14233/) (2023)
- [OpenAssistant Conversations -- Democratizing Large Language Model Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.07327/) (2023)
- [SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes: A Comparative Study of Foundation Model Post-training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.17161/) (2025)
- [ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07691/) (2024)
- [Zephyr: Direct Distillation of LM Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16944/) (2023)
- [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)
- [SLiC-HF: Sequence Likelihood Calibration with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10425/) (2023)
- [Contrastive Preference Optimization: Pushing the Boundaries of LLM Performance in Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.08417/) (2024)

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

- [Are Human-Aligned Models Models of Humans? A Turing-Test Gap in Preference Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.23640/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has become the de facto standard for offline preference alignment of large language models, but its reliance on a reference policy introduces a critical tension. DPO weighs each update relative to a reference, which stabilizes the training by regularizing the updates within a trusted region. This reliance becomes problematic for pessimistic pairs, where the reference model prefers the rejected response. For these pairs, DPO prematurely attenuates the gradient as soon as the policy margin (Deltaθ) merely beats the reference margin (Deltaref) even if the policy is still wrong (Deltaθ<0). We name this failure premature satisfaction, which is a concrete form of the training-inference mismatch. Reference-free objectives remove this mismatch by optimizing the absolute margin, but at the cost of discarding the stabilizing signal of the reference. We mitigate this tension with Hybrid-DPO (HyPO), a drop-in modification to DPO that applies reference conditionally: HyPO behaves exactly like DPO when the reference is optimistic or neutral, and it treats the reference as neutral when it is pessimistic by replacing Deltaθ-Deltaref with Deltaθ-max0,Deltaref. This one-line change strictly strengthens per-example learning signals on pessimistic pairs while preserving DPO's objective form and computational cost. By conditionally debiasing the pessimistic reference signal, HyPO mitigates premature satisfaction; empirically, across preference alignment, HyPO improves inference-aligned metrics and achieves higher pairwise win rates. Our results provide evidence that direct preference alignment could be enhanced by conditionally debiasing the reference signal, rather than discarding it.