mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Provenance-Grounded Gating and Adaptive Recovery in Synthetic Post-Training Data Curation

arXiv 2606.11127 ↗First posted 9 Jun 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → LLM preference optimization methods

Abstract (arXiv)

Synthetic post-training pipelines commonly filter generated samples with reward models or holistic LLM judges, yet two practices remain rarely examined together: whether the filtering signal is grounded in the source evidence that induced each generation, and whether rejected samples can be systematically recovered rather than permanently discarded. We present a controlled study of both questions across gate configurations, recovery strategies, and generator scales, using adversarially injected corpora to provide ground-truth failure labels. We find that exact source provenance improves faithfulness gating for stronger judges, that hallucination and reward gates reject largely disjoint sample populations making both necessary, and that an adaptive recovery pipeline combining failure diagnosis with targeted regeneration achieves higher yield, recovery rate, and injection recall than naive resampling. Downstream fine-tuning quality is driven primarily by generator scale, with filtration and recovery conditions contributing meaningfully but secondarily.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 15 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Jun 2026.

Builds on

15 of 25 references.

References · 15

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  2. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  3. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
  4. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  5. 2019PubMedQA: A Dataset for Biomedical Research Question Answeringcited by 1,288
  6. 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 900
  7. 2023RAFT: Reward rAnked FineTuning for Generative Foundation Model Alignmentcited by 686
  8. 2024Self-Rewarding Language Modelscited by 681
  9. 2023Beyond Human Data: Scaling Self-Training for Problem-Solving with Language Modelscited by 349
  10. 2021CUAD: An Expert-Annotated NLP Dataset for Legal Contract Reviewcited by 236
  11. 2023LM vs LM: Detecting Factual Errors via Cross Examinationcited by 156
  12. 2022FaithDial: A Faithful Benchmark for Information-Seeking Dialoguecited by 109
3 more
  1. 2024CheckEval: A reliable LLM-as-a-Judge framework for evaluating text generation using checklistscited by 94
  2. 2024AgentInstruct: Toward Generative Teaching with Agentic Flowscited by 89
  3. 2021Increasing Faithfulness in Knowledge-Grounded Dialogue with Controllable Featurescited by 74

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026From Behavior to Provenance: Attributing Tabular Foundation Models to Synthetic Pretraining Data
  2. 2026Source Identification Is Not Fitness Testing: Measuring the Limits of Synthetic-Data Attribution
  3. 2026Effective Synthetic Data Curation Requires Group-Level Signals
  4. 2026From Collapse to Improvement: Statistical Perspectives on the Evolutionary Dynamics of Iterative Training on Contaminated Sources
  5. 2025Escaping Model Collapse via Synthetic Data Verification: Near-term Improvements and Long-term Convergence
  6. 2026SynthSentry: Detecting Synthetic Data Contamination in Language Model Training Data
  7. 2026Failed Reasoning Traces Tell You What Is Fixable (But Not by Reading Them)
  8. 2026Phantom Gains: Auditing Self-Improvement Against a Measured Null