Optimal Transport for LLM Reward Modeling from Noisy Preference
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Reward modeling and RLHF
Abstract (arXiv)
Reward models are fundamental to Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), yet real-world datasets are inevitably corrupted by noisy preference. Conventional training objectives tend to overfit these errors, while existing denoising approaches often rely on homogeneous noise assumptions that fail to capture the complexity of linguistic preferences. To handle these challenges, we propose SelectiveRM, a framework grounded in optimal transport. We first devise a Joint Consistency Discrepancy to align the distribution of model predictions with preference data. Furthermore, to address the limitation of strict mass conservation which compels the model to fit outliers, we incorporate a Mass Relaxation mechanism via partial transport. This enables the autonomous exclusion of samples with noisy preference that contradict semantic consistency. Theoretically, we demonstrate that SelectiveRM optimizes a tighter upper bound on the unobserved clean risk. Extensive experiments validate that our approach significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines across diverse benchmarks.
Key facts. Cited by 3 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 34 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 May 2026.
Builds on
34 of 48 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Reward Shaping to Mitigate Reward Hacking in RLHF26 Feb
- 2024RLHF Workflow: From Reward Modeling to Online RLHF13 May
- 2024InfoRM: Mitigating Reward Hacking in RLHF via Information-Theoretic Reward Modeling14 Feb
Other references · 31
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,796
- 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
- 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
- 2018Co-teaching: Robust Training of Deep Neural Networks with Extremely Noisy Labelscited by 1,059
- 2016Making Deep Neural Networks Robust to Label Noise: a Loss Correction Approachcited by 665
- 2020Learning from Noisy Labels with Deep Neural Networks: A Surveycited by 582
- 2023"Do Anything Now": Characterizing and Evaluating In-The-Wild Jailbreak Prompts on Large Language Modelscited by 489
- 2019Confident Learning: Estimating Uncertainty in Dataset Labelscited by 413
19 more
- 2023UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedbackcited by 406
- 2017Joint Distribution Optimal Transportation for Domain Adaptationcited by 282
- 2024PKU-SafeRLHF: Towards Multi-Level Safety Alignment for LLMs with Human Preferencecited by 261
- 2023HelpSteer: Multi-attribute Helpfulness Dataset for SteerLMcited by 142
- 2021Unbalanced minibatch Optimal Transport; applications to Domain Adaptationcited by 125
- 2021Sample Selection with Uncertainty of Losses for Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 79
- 2021To Smooth or Not? When Label Smoothing Meets Noisy Labelscited by 70
- 2021Clusterability as an Alternative to Anchor Points When Learning with Noisy Labelscited by 65
- 2022Instance-Dependent Label-Noise Learning with Manifold-Regularized Transition Matrix Estimationcited by 49
- 2023Optimal Transport for Treatment Effect Estimationcited by 32
- 2023FFT: Towards Harmlessness Evaluation and Analysis for LLMs with Factuality, Fairness, Toxicitycited by 25
- 2025Early Stopping Against Label Noise Without Validation Datacited by 21
- 2023BadLabel: A Robust Perspective on Evaluating and Enhancing Label-noise Learningcited by 16
- 2025DistDF: Time-Series Forecasting Needs Joint-Distribution Wasserstein Alignmentcited by 13
- 2022Instance-dependent Label Distribution Estimation for Learning with Label Noisecited by 10
- 2023A Survey on the Role of Crowds in Combating Online Misinformation: Annotators, Evaluators, and Creatorscited by 6
- 2025ε-Softmax: Approximating One-Hot Vectors for Mitigating Label Noisecited by 6
- 2025SelectMix: Enhancing Label Noise Robustness through Targeted Sample Mixingcited by 5
- 2025GAPO: Learning Preferential Prompt through Generative Adversarial Policy Optimizationcited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025On Symmetric Losses for Robust Policy Optimization with Noisy Preferences
- 2025APLOT: Robust Reward Modeling via Adaptive Preference Learning with Optimal Transport
- 2026Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback: A Statistical Perspective
- 2023Contrastive Preference Learning: Learning from Human Feedback without RL
- 2025Two Minds Better Than One: Collaborative Reward Modeling for LLM Alignment
- 2024Reward Model Learning vs. Direct Policy Optimization: A Comparative Analysis of Learning from Human Preferences
- 2025Greedy Sampling Is Provably Efficient for RLHF
- 2025On the Robustness of Reward Models for Language Model Alignment