From Soft Targets to Reward Signals: How Assignment and Reward Objectives Interact
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Soft preference targets specify supervision strength, and reward objectives convert that strength into learned reward signals. A central design question remains: how does assigning a fixed set of preference strengths to different response pairs change the rewards produced by different objectives? We introduce assignment geometry to study this interaction. Mean-matched smoothing controls target dispersion, while within-stratum reassignment changes correspondence and preserves the complete target distribution. Across five reward objectives, intact correspondence retains the largest clean preference margins among the compared soft targets within a common accuracy-equivalence budget. Attenuation orderings change with the reward objective, revealing different responses to the same target assignments. Independent reassignments and a related source construction reproduce the retention direction. An attenuation-retention profile compares these combinations through margin magnitude, edit response, and accuracy. Against independently calibrated scaling, APLOT uniform targets deliver additional attenuation on both aggregate and presentation edits. These findings establish a joint design space in which target placement and reward objective shape reward properties beyond preference accuracy.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.
Builds on
18 of 23 references.
References · 18
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2015Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Networkcited by 10,324
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2021DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharingcited by 1,254
- 2022Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimizationcited by 1,095
- 2019When Does Label Smoothing Help?cited by 988
- 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 640
- 2018Born Again Neural Networkscited by 546
- 2023UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedbackcited by 406
- 2024RM-Bench: Benchmarking Reward Models of Language Models with Subtlety and Stylecited by 176
- 2024Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization in Direct Alignment Algorithmscited by 143
6 more
- 2020Self-Distillation as Instance-Specific Label Smoothingcited by 71
- 2024Margin Matching Preference Optimization: Enhanced Model Alignment with Granular Feedbackcited by 15
- 2025On the Robustness of Reward Models for Language Model Alignmentcited by 13
- 2024Reward Modeling with Ordinal Feedback: Wisdom of the Crowdcited by 11
- 2025APLOT: Robust Reward Modeling via Adaptive Preference Learning with Optimal Transportcited by 6
- 2025When Distance Distracts: Representation Distance Bias in BT-Loss for Reward Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.