Gradient-Aligned Pair Selection for Personalized Preference Optimization
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Personalizing large language models (LLMs) requires aligning generation behavior with user-specific preferences rather than aggregate quality. While Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) provides a stable framework for preference learning, its effectiveness in personalized settings critically depends on how preference pairs are selected. Existing approaches typically rely on heuristic criteria, such as likelihood-based extremes, which decouple optimization from explicit user utility and can lead to degraded personalization. We formalize personalized preference learning as a geometry-aligned optimization problem by analyzing the first-order interaction between gradients of expected user utility and DPO update directions. Our analysis reveals that, under off-policy sampling, the DPO update transitions from a purely error-corrective signal to a reinforcement-like update when preference margins are directionally aligned with utility gradients. This perspective exposes pair selection as a geometric decision that governs whether preference optimization advances or hinders personalization. Motivated by this insight, we propose GAP-DPO (Geometry-Aligned Preference DPO), an iterative algorithm that performs utility-aware, geometry-aligned pair selection while controlling distribution shift via epoch-wise regeneration. Experiments on personalized text generation benchmarks show that GAP-DPO consistently improves stylistic fidelity, preference alignment, and generation quality compared to standard DPO variants. Together, our results establish gradient alignment as a unifying principle for personalized preference optimization and demonstrate that pair selection is an intrinsic component of the optimization geometry rather than a heuristic preprocessing step.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Sep 2026.
Builds on
35 of 43 references.
References · 35
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,576
- 2019Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferencescited by 2,150
- 2021Unsupervised Dense Information Retrieval with Contrastive Learningcited by 1,216
- 2017Constrained Policy Optimizationcited by 983
- 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferencescited by 912
- 2024ORPO: Monolithic Preference Optimization without Reference Modelcited by 562
- 2024A Survey on RAG Meeting LLMs: Towards Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Modelscited by 452
- 2023LaMP: When Large Language Models Meet Personalizationcited by 437
- 2024Contrastive Preference Optimization: Pushing the Boundaries of LLM Performance in Machine Translationcited by 394
23 more
- 2024KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimizationcited by 264
- 2025WebWalker: Benchmarking LLMs in Web Traversalcited by 175
- 2024Personalizing Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with Variational Preference Learningcited by 155
- 2025From LLM Reasoning to Autonomous AI Agents: A Comprehensive Reviewcited by 149
- 2023Do LLMs Understand User Preferences? Evaluating LLMs On User Rating Predictioncited by 116
- 2024LongLaMP: A Benchmark for Personalized Long-form Text Generationcited by 97
- 2024Personalized Pieces: Efficient Personalized Large Language Models through Collaborative Effortscited by 74
- 2023Let the LLMs Talk: Simulating Human-to-Human Conversational QA via Zero-Shot LLM-to-LLM Interactionscited by 70
- 2025LLM Agents for Education: Advances and Applicationscited by 59
- 2024Bootstrapping Language Models with DPO Implicit Rewardscited by 53
- 2025Measuring What Makes You Unique: Difference-Aware User Modeling for Enhancing LLM Personalizationcited by 45
- 2025LoRe: Personalizing LLMs via Low-Rank Reward Modelingcited by 38
- 2024Personalized LLM Response Generation with Parameterized Memory Injectioncited by 33
- 2021Pre-trained Language Model for Web-scale Retrieval in Baidu Searchcited by 31
- 2025Language Model Personalization via Reward Factorizationcited by 31
- 2025NextQuill: Causal Preference Modeling for Enhancing LLM Personalizationcited by 30
- 2023Learning Personalized Alignment for Evaluating Open-ended Text Generationcited by 29
- 2025SynthesizeMe! Inducing Persona-Guided Prompts for Personalized Reward Models in LLMscited by 29
- 2025PersonaBench: Evaluating AI Models on Understanding Personal Information through Accessing (Synthetic) Private User Datacited by 27
- 2025Personalized LLM Decoding via Contrasting Personal Preferencecited by 12
- 2024A Common Pitfall of Margin-based Language Model Alignment: Gradient Entanglementcited by 10
- 2025Learning to summarize user information for personalized reinforcement learning from human feedbackcited by 10
- 2026P-Check: Advancing Personalized Reward Model via Learning to Generate Dynamic Checklistcited by 5
Built on by
Not cited yet.