# Response Time Enhances Alignment with Heterogeneous Preferences

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06987 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.06987/

## 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 22 of its 57 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 May 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, 22 of 22)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.08593/) (2019)
- [SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14734/) (2024)
- [Gemini: A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.11805/) (2023)
- [ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07691/) (2024)
- [SLiC-HF: Sequence Likelihood Calibration with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10425/) (2023)
- [KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01306/) (2024)
- [Nash Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.00886/) (2023)
- [Helping or Herding? Reward Model Ensembles Mitigate but do not Eliminate Reward Hacking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.09244/) (2023)
- [Generalized Preference Optimization: A Unified Approach to Offline Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.05749/) (2024)
- [Provably Robust DPO: Aligning Language Models with Noisy Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.00409/) (2024)
- [Distributional Preference Learning: Understanding and Accounting for Hidden Context in RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08358/) (2023)
- [Understanding the performance gap between online and offline alignment algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.08448/) (2024)
- [Value Kaleidoscope: Engaging AI with Pluralistic Human Values, Rights, and Duties](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00779/) (2023)
- [RLHF from Heterogeneous Feedback via Personalization and Preference Aggregation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.00254/) (2024)
- [Dataset Reset Policy Optimization for RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.08495/) (2024)
- [Direct Preference Optimization With Unobserved Preference Heterogeneity: The Necessity of Ternary Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.15065/) (2024)
- [A General Framework for Estimating Preferences Using Response Time Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.20403/) (2025)

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

- [AI Alignment From Social Choice Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.21550/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Aligning large language models (LLMs) to human preferences typically relies on aggregating pooled feedback into a single reward model. However, this standard approach assumes that all labelers share the same underlying preferences, ignoring the fact that real-world labelers are highly heterogeneous and usually anonymous. Consequently, relying solely on binary choice data fundamentally distorts the learned policy, making the true population-average preference unidentifiable. To overcome this critical limitation, we demonstrate that augmenting preference datasets with a simple, secondary signal -- the user's response time -- can restore the identifiability of the population's average preference. By modeling each decision as a Drift-Diffusion Model (DDM), we introduce a novel, consistent estimator of heterogeneous preferences that successfully corrects the distortions of standard choice-only labels. We prove that our estimator asymptotically converges to the true average preference even in extreme cases where each anonymous labeler contributes only a single choice. Empirically, across both synthetic and real-world datasets, our method consistently outperforms standard baselines that otherwise fail and plateau at a bias floor. Because response times are essentially free to record and require zero user tracking or identification, our results bring promises and open up new opportunities for future data-collection pipelines to improve the social benefit without requiring user-level identifiers or repeated elicitations.