Reward Learning from Best-of-N Preference Data: Targets, Tradeoffs, and Design Principles
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Reward modeling and RLHF
Abstract (arXiv)
Best-of-N sampling is widely used to construct pairwise preference data: N candidates are drawn from a base distribution, and the best is paired with a rejected response. Despite its widespread use, what Bradley--Terry (BT) reward learning extracts from such data, and how to choose N and the base distribution, remain unclear. We specialize a recent analysis of preference data via its induced conditional distribution to Best-of-N. For independent-reference variants, we derive closed-form reward targets as explicit functions of N and the base distribution, and show that they preserve the latent reward ranking. For the practical Best-vs-Random and Best-vs-Worst variants, chosen and rejected responses are coupled through the same candidate set, so exact BT representability generally fails; nevertheless, bounded-class minimizers approach the reference targets as N grows. Although margin and connectivity are known to govern sample efficiency in pairwise preference learning, Best-of-N couples them through N in opposing directions: larger N widens pairwise margins but reduces connectivity. This trade-off yields two design principles: use larger N when preference labels are the bottleneck, smaller N when generation is the bottleneck; and shape the base distribution to place mass between the responses whose comparison matters most at test time. Experiments on synthetic and real preference data support the predicted dependence on sample size and base-distribution shape.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 41 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 May 2026.
Builds on
41 of 47 references.
Closest ancestors · 11
Same direction, newest first
- 2026What Does Preference Learning Recover from Pairwise Comparison Data?10 Feb
- 2025Skywork-Reward-V2: Scaling Preference Data Curation via Human-AI Synergy2 Jul
- 2025What Makes a Reward Model a Good Teacher? An Optimization Perspective19 Mar
- 2024BOND: Aligning LLMs with Best-of-N Distillation19 Jul
- 2024Self-Rewarding Language Models18 Jan
- 2023RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback1 Sep
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model29 May
- 2023RAFT: Reward rAnked FineTuning for Generative Foundation Model Alignment13 Apr
- 2022Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization19 Oct
- 2021WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedback17 Dec
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences12 Jun
Other references · 30
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 3,050
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2024Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameterscited by 1,986
- 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,824
- 2024Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Samplingcited by 991
- 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Rewardcited by 963
- 2023UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedbackcited by 406
18 more
- 2024PKU-SafeRLHF: Towards Multi-Level Safety Alignment for LLMs with Human Preferencecited by 261
- 2024Direct Language Model Alignment from Online AI Feedbackcited by 260
- 2024Theoretical guarantees on the best-of-n alignment policycited by 124
- 2024BoNBoN Alignment for Large Language Models and the Sweetness of Best-of-n Samplingcited by 121
- 2024Unpacking DPO and PPO: Disentangling Best Practices for Learning from Preference Feedbackcited by 107
- 2025Is Best-of-N the Best of Them? Coverage, Scaling, and Optimality in Inference-Time Alignmentcited by 97
- 2023Aligning Large Language Models through Synthetic Feedbackcited by 75
- 2024Variational Best-of-N Alignmentcited by 51
- 2024RS-DPO: A Hybrid Rejection Sampling and Direct Preference Optimization Method for Alignment of Large Language Modelscited by 48
- 2024Asymptotics of Language Model Alignmentcited by 47
- 2023RLCD: Reinforcement Learning from Contrastive Distillation for Language Model Alignmentcited by 43
- 2025Soft Best-of-n Sampling for Model Alignmentcited by 30
- 2024Filtered Direct Preference Optimizationcited by 24
- 2025Best-of-N through the Smoothing Lens: KL Divergence and Regret Analysiscited by 17
- 2025Sample Complexity and Representation Ability of Test-time Scaling Paradigmscited by 12
- 2025What Matters in Data for DPO?cited by 12
- 2024Faster WIND: Accelerating Iterative Best-of-N Distillation for LLM Alignmentcited by 9
- 2016Learning Combinatorial Functions from Pairwise Comparisonscited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Preference Learning with Response Time: Robust Losses and Guarantees
- 2026On the Complexity of Preference-Based Bandits
- 2026Variance-aware Reward Modeling with Anchor Guidance
- 2025DCRM: A Heuristic to Measure Response Pair Quality in Preference Optimization
- 2024Reward Learning From Preference With Ties
- 2025Best of mini-N in-loop Sampling: A Contextual Quality Reward Model for Reliable and Efficient Best-of-N Sampling
- 2025APLOT: Robust Reward Modeling via Adaptive Preference Learning with Optimal Transport
- 2024Enhancing Preference-based Linear Bandits via Human Response Time