A Unifying Lens on Reward Uncertainty in RLHF

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) aligns large language models by training reward models on preference data and optimizing policies to maximize predicted rewards. However, this pipeline faces two fundamental challenges: (1) reward models cannot signal when their predictions are unreliable, since they usually act as deterministic point estimators; and (2) modern group-based policy optimization can amplify unreliable reward signals, as exemplified by GRPO's uniform treatment of rewards during advantage computation. As policies explore increasingly diverse responses, these two limitations create a critical vulnerability: unreliable reward estimates may be granted disproportionate influence, triggering severe reward hacking. We propose Uncertainty-Aware Reward Modeling (UARM), which equips reward models with calibrated uncertainty via quantile-based conformal prediction and reweights GRPO advantages through heteroscedastic variance decomposition. Experiments across HelpSteer, UltraFeedback, and PKU-SafeRLHF demonstrate that UARM significantly improves reward model calibration, reduces reward hacking, and enhances downstream alignment quality compared to standard GRPO and uncertainty-agnostic baselines.

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) systems face a compounding alignment challenge: not only are learned reward models uncertain about unseen state-action pairs, but the human preference annotations they are trained on are themselves inconsistent, context-dependent, and noisy. Existing approaches address these uncertainty sources in isolation - epistemic uncertainty is used to guide exploration, while preference uncertainty is absorbed during reward model training but discarded during policy optimization. We introduce Uncertainty-Aware Reward Discounting (UARD), a principled framework that jointly models epistemic uncertainty in value estimation via ensemble disagreement and aleatoric uncertainty in human preference annotations via annotator variability, combining these signals through a confidence-adjusted Reliability Filter that adaptively modulates reward weighting during policy optimization. We prove that this dynamic discounting preserves the contraction property of the Bellman operator, guaranteeing convergence to a unique fixed point, and provide an information-theoretic justification grounded in the Information Bottleneck principle. Empirically, UARD reduces reward hacking incidents by up to 93.6% across discrete decision-making and continuous control benchmarks (MuJoCo) compared to nine baselines including DQN, Ensemble-DQN, CQL, CPO, TRPO, SAC, EDAC, SUNRISE, and PPO, while maintaining competitive task performance on well-specified rewards. Under annotation noise ranging from 10% to 30% Gaussian perturbation, UARD retains near-zero safety violations compared to baselines' near-linear degradation. These results demonstrate that treating uncertainty as an active component of the optimization objective - rather than a passive diagnostic signal - provides a principled pathway toward more reliable and aligned RL systems.

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is a central post-training tool for aligning large language models, but its training reward is only a learned proxy for true human utility. This creates a decision problem under objective misspecification: the policy is optimized against an estimated reward, while deployment performance is governed by an unobserved population preference. The resulting gap leads to reward over-optimization, where proxy reward keeps improving after true quality deteriorates. We propose distributionally robust regret optimization (DRRO) for RLHF with a Wasserstein ambiguity set over reward laws, using promptwise $\ell_p$ distances between reward vectors as transport costs. Unlike standard distributionally robust optimization, which pessimizes worst-case value, DRRO pessimizes worst-case regret relative to the best policy under the same plausible reward perturbation. We show that the expressive-policy problem decomposes into promptwise regret problems. For each prompt, the inner adversary has a dual-norm closed form; under the $\ell_1$ transport cost used by our algorithm, the optimizer has a water-filling structure. These results lead to a practical policy-gradient algorithm that adds a simple sampled bonus to GRPO-style training. Theory and experiments both show that DRRO is less over-pessimistic than standard DRO and mitigates over-optimization more effectively than existing baselines.