Decomposing the Delta: What Do Models Actually Learn from Preference Pairs?
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Process reward models for reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
Preference optimization methods such as DPO and KTO are widely used for aligning language models, yet little is understood about what properties of preference data drive downstream reasoning gains. We ask: what aspects of a preference pair improve a reasoning model's performance on general reasoning tasks? We investigate two distinct notions of quality delta in preference data: generator-level delta, arising from the differences in capability between models that generate chosen and rejected reasoning traces, and sample-level delta, arising from differences in judged quality differences within an individual preference pair. To study generator-level delta, we vary the generator's scale and model family, and to study sample-level delta, we employ an LLM-as-a-judge to rate the quality of generated traces along multiple reasoning-quality dimensions. We find that increasing generator-level delta steadily improves performance on out-of-domain reasoning tasks and filtering data by sample-level delta can enable more data-efficient training. Our results suggest a twofold recipe for improving reasoning performance through preference optimization: maximize generator-level delta when constructing preference pairs and exploit sample-level delta to select the most informative training examples.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Process reward models for reasoning, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 37 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Apr 2026.
Builds on
37 of 42 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Full-Step-DPO: Self-Supervised Preference Optimization with Step-wise Rewards for Mathematical Reasoning20 Feb
- 2024Step-DPO: Step-wise Preference Optimization for Long-chain Reasoning of LLMs26 Jun
- 2024Iterative Reasoning Preference Optimization30 Apr
Other references · 34
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
- 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 1,906
- 2024MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmarkcited by 1,758
- 2022Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Modelscited by 1,359
- 2025s1: Simple test-time scalingcited by 1,311
22 more
- 2024OlympiadBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Promoting AGI with Olympiad-Level Bilingual Multimodal Scientific Problemscited by 1,099
- 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Rewardcited by 951
- 2024ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoningcited by 277
- 2024HelpSteer2: Open-source dataset for training top-performing reward modelscited by 232
- 2023TheoremQA: A Theorem-driven Question Answering datasetcited by 189
- 2022ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 175
- 2025Llama-Nemotron: Efficient Reasoning Modelscited by 151
- 2023HelpSteer: Multi-attribute Helpfulness Dataset for SteerLMcited by 140
- 2024Aligning Diffusion Models by Optimizing Human Utilitycited by 99
- 2023ReCEval: Evaluating Reasoning Chains via Correctness and Informativenesscited by 76
- 2024Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning Beyond Accuracycited by 69
- 2024Unintentional Unalignment: Likelihood Displacement in Direct Preference Optimizationcited by 66
- 2025Evaluating Step-by-step Reasoning Traces: A Surveycited by 62
- 2023MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluationcited by 57
- 2025Can Large Language Models Detect Errors in Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning?cited by 43
- 2024MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMscited by 30
- 2023SocREval: Large Language Models with the Socratic Method for Reference-Free Reasoning Evaluationcited by 27
- 2025The Delta Learning Hypothesis: Preference Tuning on Weak Data can Yield Strong Gainscited by 25
- 2025Focused-DPO: Enhancing Code Generation Through Focused Preference Optimization on Error-Prone Pointscited by 14
- 2025Rethinking DPO: The Role of Rejected Responses in Preference Misalignmentcited by 14
- 2025What Defines Good Reasoning in LLMs? Dissecting Reasoning Steps with Multi-Aspect Evaluationcited by 10
- 2024Varying Shades of Wrong: Aligning LLMs with Wrong Answers Onlycited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025From Noisy Traces to Stable Gradients: Bias-Variance Optimized Preference Optimization for Aligning Large Reasoning Models
- 2025Assessing Judging Bias in Large Reasoning Models: An Empirical Study
- 2025Clear Preferences Leave Traces: Reference Model-Guided Sampling for Preference Learning
- 2026Continuous-Utility Direct Preference Optimization
- 2026Forward versus Backward: Comparing Reasoning Objectives in Direct Preference Optimization
- 2025Probability-Consistent Preference Optimization for Enhanced LLM Reasoning
- 2025Measuring Reasoning Utility in LLMs via Conditional Entropy Reduction
- 2024PORT: Preference Optimization on Reasoning Traces