Groupwise Distortion Guarantees for Preference-Based Alignment

While Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is the standard paradigm for aligning large language models with human preferences, its effectiveness in pluralistic settings has been called into question. Notably, recent work by G"olz et al. (2025) demonstrated that the \textit{distortion} -- defined as the multiplicative gap between the average user utility of the RLHF policy and the optimal average utility -- can scale exponentially with the Bradley-Terry temperature parameter $\beta$ when users have heterogeneous preferences. In this work, we present a fine-grained analysis of the distortion of RLHF with reward clipping and demonstrate that such exponential degradation is not a fundamental property of the algorithm but rather a consequence of distribution mismatch between the distribution generating preference data ($\mu$) and the KL reference policy ($\pi_{\mathrm{ref}}$). To this end, we establish tight upper and lower bounds on the distortion of RLHF across multiple regimes of the KL regularization strength. We show that in a representative regime, under the Bradley-Terry model, the distortion is $\tilde{\Theta}(\beta B + \beta)$, where $B$ is an upper bound on the log density ratio between $\mu$ and $\pi_{\mathrm{ref}}$. In particular, when there is no distribution mismatch (i.e., $\mu = \pi_{\mathrm{ref}}$), RLHF achieves the optimal distortion of $O(\beta)$ up to a constant. Our results suggest that, to reasonably maximize average utility with RLHF, it is preferable to use on-policy sampled preference data or to fine-tune before RLHF on data from a source close to $\mu$.

Despite their sophisticated general-purpose capabilities, Large Language Models (LLMs) often fail to align with diverse individual preferences because standard post-training methods, like Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF), optimize for a single, global objective. While Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) is a widely adopted on-policy reinforcement learning framework, its group-based normalization implicitly assumes that all samples are exchangeable, inheriting this limitation in personalized settings. This assumption conflates distinct user reward distributions and systematically biases learning toward dominant preferences while suppressing minority signals. To address this, we introduce Personalized GRPO (P-GRPO), a novel alignment framework that decouples advantage estimation from immediate batch statistics. By normalizing advantages against preference-group-specific reward histories rather than the concurrent generation group, P-GRPO preserves the contrastive signal necessary for learning distinct preferences. We evaluate P-GRPO across diverse tasks and find that it consistently achieves faster convergence and higher rewards than standard GRPO, thereby enhancing its ability to recover and align with heterogeneous preference signals. Our results demonstrate that accounting for reward heterogeneity at the optimization level is essential for building models that faithfully align with diverse human preferences without sacrificing general capabilities.

Large language model (LLM) alignment via reinforcement learning from human preferences (RLHF) suffers from unstable policy updates, ambiguous gradient directions, poor interpretability, and high gradient variance in mainstream pairwise preference learning paradigms. To systematically address these limitations, we establish a unified theoretical framework for preference-based RL optimization centered on the Pair-GRPO family, comprising two tightly coupled variants: Soft-Pair-GRPO and Hard-Pair-GRPO. Soft-Pair-GRPO is a minimal modification of Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) that replaces group-normalized scalar rewards with binary pairwise preference rewards, retaining GRPO's clipped surrogate and KL-regularized structure. We prove a critical gradient equivalence theorem: under first-order Taylor expansion around the current policy, Soft-Pair-GRPO's gradient is a positive scalar multiple of standard GRPO's gradient, explaining its empirical stability despite discarding continuous reward magnitudes. Building on this foundation, we propose Hard-Pair-GRPO, an advanced variant introducing explicit local probability constraints and constrained KL-fitting optimization to further suppress gradient noise and global policy drift. We provide comprehensive theoretical guarantees for both variants--including monotonic policy improvement, deterministic gradient direction, gradient-variance reduction, and dynamic step-size convergence. Extensive experiments on standard LLM alignment benchmarks (HH-RLHF,UltraFeedback) and the MuJoCo continuous control task HalfCheetah-v4 demonstrate that our Pair-GRPO family consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in alignment quality, human preference win rate, training stability, and generalization to general reinforcement learning. Ablation studies validate the critical contributions of each core component.