Direct preference optimization (DPO) is an effective technique to train language models to generate preferred over dispreferred responses. However, this binary "winner-takes-all" approach is suboptimal for vision-language models whose response quality is highly dependent on visual content. In particular, a response may still be faithful to the visual inputs even if it is less preferable than an alternative. The standard Bradley-Terry DPO formulation lacks this nuance, upweighting winning responses without sufficient regard for whether the "losing" response still maintains high visual fidelity. In this work, we investigate ranking optimization as an alternative that more precisely situates responses' faithfulness to visual inputs. We focus on video-text alignment using detailed video captions, proposing a method to generate challenging, totally ordered caption chains at scale through repeated caption degradation. Our results show ranking optimization outperforms binary DPO for long-form content generation and assessment, and importantly, we find that these approaches require finetuning of the vision encoder to be effective, challenging the view of DPO as purely a language-reweighting process.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Existing models struggle to differentiate between visual details in long-form and detailed captions. We propose caption ranking to capture fine-grained differences for video-language alignment.
Figure 2: Our proposed framework. Given a set of high-quality video captions, an LLM generates a totally ordered caption chain by repeatedly introducing visually-grounded errors into the previous caption. These caption chains are then used to train VLMs by having them rank the generated captions using ranking-based DPO. The captions’ similarity forces the models to pay attention to fine, visually-grounded details.
Figure 3: Error types used to generate caption chains through repeated caption mutation.
Method
On-Policy
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Error Injection (MPO)
✗
4.90
4.62
5.38
8.46
Ours - Caption Degradation (Rank)
✗
5.27
4.92
5.75
8.47
Response Improvement
✓
5.07
4.92
5.32
7.61
Response Comparison
✓
5.12
4.71
5.47
8.60
RLAIF-V
✓
5.13
4.83
5.52
8.57
Table 1: Comparison of our proposed Caption Degradation method to other on- and off-policy DPO data generation methods with the PLM model. Captions are evaluated by LLM-as-a-Judge along Relevance ( Rel. ), Descriptiveness ( Descr. ), Temporal Consistency ( Temp C. ), and Fluency ( Flu. ) on PE-Video.
Method
PerceptionLM
Qwen2.5-VL
MSR-VTT
PE-Video
MSR-VTT
PE-Video
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Pretrained
6.29
5.49
6.18
7.19
6.72
6.04
5.82
6.98
6.73
6.14
6.61
8.69
6.74
6.12
6.63
8.69
SFT
6.44
6.37
6.98
8.54
6.35
5.60
6.07
8.15
7.13
6.83
7.76
9.14
7.31
7.24
7.64
9.35
DPO
7.29
7.34
8.02
9.33
7.57
7.59
7.78
9.43
7.12
6.86
7.77
9.13
7.33
7.25
7.60
9.36
MPO
7.31
7.38
8.08
9.32
7.57
7.59
7.80
9.42
7.11
6.89
7.84
9.15
7.35
7.27
7.66
9.34
Table 2: Captioning results on PE-Video and MSR-VTT splits of Rcc . Models trained with the ranking objective perform best across the board, with DPO-based methods outperforming SFT. We note that MPO and DPO benefit from captions generated with our Caption Degradation method as they are fine-tuned on it.
Cap. Chains
Err. Inj.
Rank.
Other
Rank.
Other
vs. MPO
53%
47%
60%
40%
vs. DPO
56%
44%
61%
39%
Table 3: Head-to-head human evaluation of PLM on Rcc -PVD. Ranking objective combined with ordered caption chains outperform DPO and MPO 20% and 21%. On the other hand, our ordered caption chain data improves the MPO and DPO baselines by 7% and 5%.
PerceptionLM
Qwen2.5-VL
Method
VDC
Argus
VDC
Argus
Score
Accuracy
Cost-H (↓)
Cost-O (↓)
Score
Accuracy
Cost-H (↓)
Cost-O (↓)
Pretrained
2.01
.382
.679
.895
2.30
.443
.664
.820
SFT
1.95
.373
.712
.875
2.33
.453
.703
.786
DPO
2.26
.436
.570
.806
2.34
.454
.683
.786
MPO
2.27
.438
.572
.801
2.35
.455
.684
.772
Table 4: Results on the VDC and ARGUS video captioning benchmarks. Ranking-based models show strong performance from both families. MPO and DPO benefit from our data generation approach (ordered captions) as they are fine-tuned on it.
Table 8
Metric
SFT
DPO
Rank
✗
✓
✗
✓
✗
✓
Relevance
7.31
7.34
7.33
7.35
7.34
7.46
Descriptiveness
7.24
7.25
7.23
7.25
7.25
7.40
Temporal Consistency
7.64
7.62
7.61
7.60
7.64
7.75
Fluency
9.35
9.35
9.34
9.36
9.36
9.40
Table 7: Performance of Qwen2.5-VL with a frozen (✗) or fine-tuned ( ✓ ) vision encoder on PE-Video. Fine-tuning the Vision Encoder is critical for our Ranking objective.
Figure 4: Performance of Qwen2.5-VL and PLM w.r.t number of captions utilized in the chain. Model performance generally increases with chain length.
Loss
PerceptionLM
Qwen2.5-VL
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Hinge
7.58
7.72
7.88
9.47
7.34
7.36
7.79
9.38
Plackett-Luce DPO
7.67
7.72
7.93
9.49
7.46
7.40
7.75
9.40
Table 8: Comparison between models trained with different losses on Rcc -PVD.
Figure 5: Qualitative comparison of our Ranking model vs. an SFT baseline. Green highlights video-grounded descriptions. The Ranking model captures finer details better than SFT. See Appendix for more in-depth comparison and examples.
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Method
MSR-VTT
PE-Video
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
PerceptionLM
Pretrained
3.16
2.83
3.32
6.89
3.65
3.09
2.83
6.62
SFT
3.68
3.55
4.41
7.95
3.81
3.14
3.53
8.06
DPO
4.45
4.32
5.60
8.56
5.03
4.60
5.30
8.69
MPO
4.45
4.36
5.56
8.57
5.06
4.61
5.29
8.70
Appendix
Table 1: Captioning results on PE-Video and MSR-VTT splits of Rcc using GPT-OSS as a judge to ensure that evaluations are not biased by Claude. Captions are evaluated by Relevance ( Rel. ), Descriptiveness ( Descr. ), Temporal Consistency ( Temp C. ), and Fluency ( Flu. ). Our ranking method achieves the best or tied-best results across nearly all metrics and datasets.
Method
METEOR
ROUGE-L
Pretrained
.152
.234
SFT
.124
.201
DPO
.196
.292
MPO
.196
.293
Ranking
.199
.293
Appendix
Table 2: Non-LLM-as-judge metrics for PLM on Rcc -PVD. We note that DPO and MPO benefit from the data generated by our caption degradation method as they are fine-tuned on it. The Ranking provides further gains compared to MPO given that both are fine-tuned on the dataset generated by our method.
Model
Error
Condition.
Rcc -PVD
Relevance
Descriptiveness
Temporal C.
Flu.
PerceptionLM
✗
7.48
7.41
7.62
8.80
PerceptionLM
✓
7.67
7.72
7.93
9.49
Appendix
Table 3: Comparison between PLM trained on chains generated with error-conditioning vs. PLM trained on chains with freely introduced errors.
Model
Relevance
Descriptiveness
Temporal Consist.
Fluency
MPO (Indep. Errs)
4.90
4.62
5.38
8.46
Ranking
5.27
4.92
5.75
8.47
Appendix
Table 4: Comparison between progressively degraded caption chains vs. sets of captions where each caption contains a single, independent error based on the original caption. Captions are generated and evaluations performed by GPT-OSS 20B. Progressive degradation with ranking outperforms independent errors across all metrics.
Method
On-Policy
PE-Video
Rel.
Descr.
Temp C.
Flu.
PerceptionLM
Pretrained
✗
3.65
3.09
2.83
6.62
Rank
✗
5.27
4.92
5.75
8.47
Response Comparison
✓
5.03
4.79
5.51
8.45
With Pre-SFT
✓
5.12
4.71
5.47
8.60
Appendix
Table 5: Comparison between on- and off-policy data generation methods training PLM on Rcc -PVD. Despite having model-tailored data generation, the on-policy baselines do not outperform our ranking approach on video detailed captioning. Data generated and evaluated with GPT-OSS 20B.
Method
Relevance
Descriptiveness
Temporal C.
Fluency
RankNet [ 4 ]
4.91
4.67
5.42
8.52
Hinge
4.86
4.63
5.36
8.43
Plackett-Luce
5.27
4.92
5.75
8.47
Appendix
Table 6: Comparison of ranking losses with PLM on Rcc -PVD. The Plackett-Luce loss achieves the best results on three out of four metrics.
Figure 2: An example of model caption predictions on MSR-VTT with GPT-OSS 20B as a judge.
Figure 3: Examples from our Long-Form Multiple Choice Question Answering benchmark. Green represents the correct answer.
While Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has become the de facto approach for aligning Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs), it suffers from Likelihood Displacement, where the probability of both chosen and rejected responses collapses. This optimization flaw is especially detrimental in multimodal settings: the erosion of chosen likelihoods -- a failure we term Visual Anchor Collapse -- causes models to abandon visual evidence for strong language priors, precipitating significant hallucinations. To address this, we propose Asymmetric Constrained Preference Optimization (ACPO), a modality-agnostic alignment mechanism that applies dynamic, target-oriented scaling to preference optimization. ACPO derives a complexity-aware scaling coefficient applied exclusively to the rejected reward, asymmetrically suppressing the gradient flow on the rejected term while preserving the chosen distribution as a gradient-stable reference. While fundamentally a general-purpose objective, breaking this gradient symmetry is crucial for multimodal tasks, as it mitigates the suppression of visual tokens by language priors. Experiments on InternVL models demonstrate that ACPO effectively reverses the chosen-reward degradation of standard DPO. By halting Visual Anchor Collapse, ACPO generally outperforms baselines on hallucination benchmarks (HallusionBench, MM-IFEval) and general leaderboards (MMBench, MMStar, OCRBenchV2) while driving concurrent improvements in general capabilities.
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) can generate rich video captions, yet often misidentify which person performs an action or which limb is involved, particularly across camera cuts. Improving these details requires evaluation and training that distinguish missing information from incorrect assertions. We introduce FlexBench, a benchmark spanning 3,105 shots and 18,161 evaluation queries, with human-verified identities and systematic per-person coverage of fine-grained limb actions and states. Its reference-derived checklists support automated assessment of complete captions in their person and shot contexts. Our Graded Physical Alignment score (GPA) awards credit for correct content and deducts points for incorrect or fabricated actions, making these errors explicit in the aggregate score. Building on this rubric, we propose Graded Margin Direct Preference Optimization (GM-DPO), which assigns stronger preference margins and greater training weight to more severe action errors. Across three VLM backbones, GM-DPO achieves the highest substantive-action and GPA scores among the evaluated preference objectives, improving GPA over DPO by 2.02-3.40 points. On Qwen3-8B, it reduces the weighted hallucination rate by 21.3% relative to DPO. These gains accompany sustained long-form output, improved shot structure, and competitive performance on three additional multimodal benchmarks.
Yanan Wang, Tingsong Li, Kaixun Jiang +3
Zhejiang University · Alibaba Token Hub, Alibaba Group · University of Science and Technology of China +2
The effectiveness of Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) depends on preference data that reflect the quality differences that matter in multimodal tasks. Existing pipelines often rely on off-policy perturbations or coarse outcome-based signals, which are not well suited to fine-grained visual reasoning. We propose rDPO, a preference optimization framework based on instance-specific rubrics. For each image-instruction pair, we create a checklist-style rubric of essential and additional criteria to score responses from any possible policies. The instruction-rubric pool is built offline and reused during the construction of on-policy data. On public reward modeling benchmarks, rubric-based prompting massively improves a 30B-A3B judge and brings it close to GPT-5.4. On public downstream benchmarks, rubric-based filtering raises the macro average to 82.69, whereas outcome-based filtering drops it to 75.82 from 81.14. When evaluating scalability on a comprehensive benchmark, rDPO achieves 61.01, markedly outperforming the style-constrained baseline (52.36) and surpassing the 59.48 base model. Together, these results show that visual preference optimization benefits from combining on-policy data construction with instance-specific criterion-level feedback.