Direct Preference Optimization

Personalizing exoskeleton assistance across operating conditions is constrained by the time and physical effort required to collect user feedback. We examined whether a user's preference landscape varies smoothly across operating conditions and when this continuity supports learning from limited feedback. We propose Context-Continuous Preference Learning (CCPL), a Gaussian-process preference model that shares observations across nearby contexts while retaining context-specific utility estimates. We evaluated CCPL through simulations and retrospective analyses of ankle and elbow exoskeleton preference data from nine healthy adults. In simulations, CCPL improved reconstruction and preference-based Bayesian optimization relative to independent learning when preferences varied smoothly, but showed negative transfer when continuity was weak. In both human studies, full-data reference landscapes estimated separately for each participant and context tended to be more similar between nearby operating conditions. With five exposures per context, CCPL increased mean reconstruction correlation with these references from 0.644 to 0.720 for ankle assistance and from 0.476 to 0.526 for elbow assistance relative to independent learning. The five-exposure budget was approximately 37% lower for ankle and 17% lower for elbow than the estimated independent-learning budgets needed to match these correlations. CCPL also improved held-out response prediction relative to independent learning, while benefits over pooled learning varied. These findings support context continuity as a basis for sharing preference observations under limited feedback, although benefits for online personalization in humans remain to be established.

Direct preference alignment methods are widely used to align large language models (LLMs) with human preferences because of their computational and memory efficiency. However, likelihood displacement motivates alternative ways to extract information from preference pairs with small likelihood margins. In this paper, we propose and analyze Comparison-based Preference Optimization (ComPO), a zeroth-order alignment method based on comparison oracles. ComPO extracts directional information from these pairs without directly optimizing a differentiable preference loss on them. We establish a convergence guarantee for its basic offline scheme under smoothness, gradient sparsity, and compatibility between the oracle and a latent objective. We further introduce online ComPO, which retains the offline comparison mechanism and uses unlabeled policy generations for reverse-KL control relative to a reference policy. Following the coverage perspective of preference fine-tuning, we establish a performance guarantee for a basic constrained scheme under local coverage and in-distribution pairwise reward accuracy. Experiments on Mistral, Llama, Gemma-2, Qwen3, and Gemma-3 models demonstrate improvements over existing direct alignment methods, including length-controlled win rates, with pair-level diagnostics providing evidence consistent with mitigating likelihood displacement.

Large language models are increasingly used to generate and evaluate online content, yet it remains unclear whether the qualities they associate with higher engagement match what real users respond to. We study this question using 1.17 million answers to 25,978 questions from Zhihu, Quora, and Reddit, comparing real platform answers and AI-generated answers across four within-question engagement levels. We introduce Ontological Preference Measurement, which represents answers along three dimensions: logic, affect, and expression. We find a systematic gap between AI preference and real user engagement: as target engagement increases, LLMs add more explicit logical structure, while real user engagement is more strongly associated with affective and expressive salience. We call this tendency logic overbinding. Based on this diagnosis, we propose Ontology-Masked Reasoning Autoencoding (OMRA), a controlled intervention that masks and reconstructs over-explained spans while preserving stance, factual content, and coherence. Across four LLM families, OMRA reduces the measured gap by an average of 54.4%. In human evaluation, OMRA wins 62.4% of pairwise preference judgments against matched real platform answers, even though the real answers are more often judged to be human-written.

Learning from human feedback has become a central paradigm for training modern AI systems, where models of human utility are used as reward models in policy learning. Existing methods typically assume a \emph{universal utility} function shared across a population and treat disagreement between annotators as stochastic variation. While suitable for objective tasks, this assumption breaks down in subjective domains where preferences vary systematically across individuals. We study the problem of subjective preference learning, in which observed choices arise from heterogeneous but internally consistent utility functions. Drawing upon rational choice theory, RCT \parencite{tversky1981framing}, we introduce \emph{individuated utility} functions conditioned on both the individual and their decision context, and propose a novel multi-stage architecture for estimating them from multi-modal data. We evaluate our framework on a newly collected dataset of more than $575{,}000$ pairwise aesthetic judgments from $2{,}398$ participants comparing automotive wheel designs. Our experiments show that individuated utility models substantially outperform universal utility models including foundation model baselines. Our results demonstrate that disagreement reflects meaningful preference heterogeneity rather than annotation noise. More broadly, our findings highlight the importance of collecting annotator attributes and learning individuated utility functions, enabling reward models that explicitly account for whose preferences they represent and faithfully capture human decision diversity.

Automated depression screening from clinical interviews requires attribution of utterances to the clinician or patient. We evaluate two datasets: DAIC-WOZ, where participant-only recordings require re-synthesizing both sides for controlled two-party evaluation, and PDCH-HAMD, comprising voice-converted real Chinese interviews for cross-lingual validation. Cascaded systems combine speaker diarization with role-assignment heuristics, so errors can propagate across stages. We propose an end-to-end model, which we named DiaWhisper, that fine-tunes Whisper-large-v3 with LoRA and an auxiliary frame-level role head for transcription and attribution, together with DiaWhisper-DPO, a failure-mined refinement that uses genuine decoding failures as DPO rejected completions without human preference annotation. On 29 DAIC-WOZ test sessions, DiaWhisper-DPO achieves 0.973 role accuracy and 0.119 DER, 72% below the strongest cascaded baseline, and reduces seed variation from σ = .205 to .002. Retrained on PDCH-HAMD, it achieves 0.757 role accuracy and improves all 78 session-seed pairs.

Continued pretraining (CPT) with data augmentation such as paraphrasing can store inside a large language model (LLM) the knowledge of a small source corpus. The stored knowledge, however, is not always retrieved correctly. We study the eliciting side rather than the storing side: we use preference optimization, which learns from pairs of a preferred (chosen) and a dispreferred (rejected) response, so that the model elicits its stored knowledge more accurately. One proposed approach takes the model's own erroneous response as rejected and the gold answer as chosen, so as to suppress the error. When the target knowledge is partially known, however, most of these rejected responses are factually correct. Using direct preference optimization (DPO) then pushes down rejected responses that contain correct knowledge and differ from the chosen answer only in style, such as length and wording. We propose style-debiased DPO (SD-DPO), which scores whether the rejected response of each pair is factually correct, inverts the preference of such pairs, and weights them so that the learning signal due to differences in style cancels out as a whole. We first test whether, on top of EntiGraph, a representative storing-side method that runs CPT on text synthesized from the corpus, our method adds accuracy efficiently. On QuALITY, the reading-comprehension QA benchmark on which EntiGraph was evaluated, SD-DPO exceeds a baseline we CPT on EntiGraph's synthetic data from the same base model and evaluate with the same procedure. The training tokens this requires are a few dozen times fewer than the additional CPT needed for the same gain. For knowledge updating, the main goal of this work, we use AToKE, a knowledge-editing benchmark for facts that change over time. There, SD-DPO reaches an overall accuracy of 0.982 and answers with the new or the old fact according to the queried period.

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) pose a dual-surface safety challenge: both intermediate reasoning traces and final answers can contain harmful content. Existing alignment methods often operate at the whole-response level, allowing unsafe reasoning to be masked by a safe-looking final answer. We propose Segment-aware Listwise Target DPO (SaLT-DPO), which addresses this gap through three mechanisms: (1) segment-aware listwise alignment that decomposes responses into reasoning and answer segments, independently scores each segment's safety, and aligns length-normalized segment rewards with soft target distributions over multiple candidates; (2) joint safety coherence regularization that applies a weakest-link principle to promote safety consistency across both segments; and (3) utility anchoring on benign prompts to mitigate over-refusal and reasoning degradation. Experiments on three LRMs show that SaLT-DPO consistently reduces unsafe rates for both reasoning and answer segments while mitigating degradation in benign compliance and preserving general reasoning performance. Ablation studies demonstrate the complementary contributions of its components.

Large Language Model alignment typically relies on learned proxy reward models, which significantly increase the memory footprint during training and are notoriously prone to instability and reward hacking. While offline methods like Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) bypass the reward model, they lose the ability to perform online exploration. If no optimization constraints are applied, this can lead to format collapse in bounded, continuous spaces. To resolve this, we propose Direct Preference Density Alignment: An alternative framework that removes the need for a learned proxy reward model while strictly preserving the benefits of online reinforcement learning. We leverage large-scale user data (approximately 90,000 samples) to construct non-parametric preference density maps, establishing an empirical reward surface. In addition to removing the reward model, Direct Preference Density Alignment enables the combination of the online structural grounding of Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) with the targeted offline refinement of DPO. We show that this GRPO+DPO combination achieves the highest performance, and in a blind audio equalization listening test, enables a 1.5B-parameter model to achieve perceptual parity with a carefully prompt-engineered GPT-4o mini baseline, using only a fraction of the inference compute.

Measuring the preferences of human users remains a fundamental challenge of AI alignment. Existing elicitation approaches struggle to efficiently discover multidimensional preferences or accurately ground these inferences in domain knowledge. To address this, we introduce GUIDE, an LLM-driven elicitation architecture that infers user preferences through conversations by combining Bayesian adaptive sampling for question selection and symbolic representation learning to initialize domain-specific preference models. GUIDE generalizes adaptive sampling to diverse elicitation questions through an extensible type system of transforms on a parameterized preference state. GUIDE produces domain-specific preference representations through an initialization process using symbolic rule-based learning to capture world knowledge and set priors over preference dimensions grounded in data about decision alternatives. The architecture provides observability and steerability to facilitate deployment and analyze elicitation processes. In silico experiments on investment portfolio optimization demonstrate that GUIDE improves cold-start and minimizes recommendation regret consistently within early elicitation interactions across user personas compared to prior work, LLM-only baselines, and ablated GUIDE versions.

We propose a preference optimization framework with Large Audio-Language Model (LALM) feedback for controllable non-verbal vocalization (NVV) generation in continuous autoregressive speech models. To construct preference data without human preference annotation, we build a bilingual prompt corpus by combining NVV-injected real transcripts with LLM-generated semantically aligned prompts, perform stochastic model rollouts, and use a LALM to rank candidate utterances and form same-prompt chosen--rejected pairs. We then adopt a two-stage optimization strategy: Rejection Sampling Fine-Tuning (RSFT) first adapts the model to LALM-selected high-scoring samples, followed by Anchored Flow-DPO, which formulates pairwise preference optimization using utterance-level flow-matching loss and retains the chosen-sample flow-matching objective as an SFT anchor. This design enables DPO-style preference learning without explicit sequence likelihoods while preserving direct supervision on preferred realizations. On the official 1,600-utterance NVVSpeech Challenge Track~2 test set, our method achieves a Final Track2Score of \textbf{75.80} (79.39 ZH / 72.21 EN), outperforming the VoxCPM2 baseline by \textbf{+1.84}. The improvements are mainly driven by higher NVV Accuracy and NVV Perceptual Effect, while Overall Quality remains stable.

LLM agents for sequential decision tasks are often post-trained with trajectory-level outcome labels, but such labels provide little supervision for preserving multiple successful branches from the same decision state. We study this problem as successful strategy coverage: how broadly a model realizes distinct successful strategies under a fixed rollout budget. We present Direct Diversity Optimization (DDO), an offline post-training method that combines Divergence-Tree Collection (DTC) with the Reference-Relative Target-Odds Objective (RTO). DTC constructs state-aligned branch sets rooted at shared decision states, and RTO trains the model to match reference-relative targets over successful alternatives. DDO achieves the strongest task success and successful strategy coverage among the compared post-training methods across BabyAI, BabaIsAI, and WebShop. It also achieves the highest recovery rate after local action replacement and higher task success and coverage than successful-only imitation and decoding-time diversification controls.

Preference alignment for flow and diffusion models now spans online reinforcement learning and offline preference optimization, but the relation between these methods remains unclear. In particular, existing forward-process alignment methods require fresh samples from the current model, while offline methods based on fixed preference pairs rely primarily on positive-only fine-tuning or DPO-style likelihood-ratio surrogates. We organize these approaches through a divergence-based framework and introduce FlowCPO, an offline forward-KL objective that uses both preferred and dispreferred samples without online rollouts. For linear interpolation, we show under explicit regularity conditions that the forward-KL objective is bounded by a contrastive flow matching loss, yielding a tractable surrogate on fixed data. We further show that this loss is nonnegative, whereas the signed regression loss of simplified FlowDPO can be unbounded below. In the in-domain setting, FlowCPO achieves higher mean GenEval and OCR scores than the evaluated baselines, reaching 0.84 and 0.87 versus 0.81 and 0.74 for FlowDPO at CFG 3.0. In the out-of-domain setting, the results are mixed, with the best GenEval result but lower reward scores than RFT on several metrics.

Real-world Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning (MORL) often suffers from sparse rewards, reward conflicts, and late-stage reward tug-of-war, causing traditional linear scalarization to experience severe metric oscillations. To address optimization conflicts among multiple objectives in real-world deployment scenarios, we propose Multi-Marginal Preference Optimization (MMPO), a fine-grained framework that intervenes at the data, gradient, and constraint levels rather than relying on coarse-grained global scalarization. Specifically, MMPO performs exposure debiasing to mitigate sparse and biased rewards, applies priority-aware orthogonal projection to decouple conflicting gradients, and introduces self-prompted gradient constraints to prevent dominant objectives from overwhelming weaker ones. Experiments on real-world e-commerce datasets show that MMPO improves training stability and consistently achieves better performance across conflicting metrics. Moreover, it generalizes robustly to broader tasks such as ToolRL and code generation, demonstrating its effectiveness as a practical paradigm for multi-objective alignment.

Vision-language models (VLMs) augmented with retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) benefit from access to external evidence. However, standard retrievers and rerankers optimize for semantic similarity rather than answer utility, creating a preference gap: documents that appear relevant may not help the generator produce a correct answer. Motivated by this, we propose a two-stage generator-in-the-loop alignment framework that closes this gap without human document-level relevance annotations. Our framework consists of two stages: in Stage 1, a VLM generates a hypothetical text passage from the image-query pair, which is used as the retrieval query for dense text search, bridging the image-to-text modality gap. In Stage 2, a cross-encoder reranker adapted with low-rank adaptation (LoRA) is fine-tuned using answer-supervised preference pairs mined from the frozen VLM: given the dataset answer label, a candidate document is labeled positive if the VLM produces the correct answer when given that document as context, and negative otherwise. This generator-guided signal is compatible with multiple alignment loss functions, including contrastive (triplet) loss, pairwise direct preference optimization (DPO), and supervised fine-tuning (SFT), and supports periodic re-mining to refresh preference pairs as the reranker improves. Experiments on VQA-X and A-OKVQA with Qwen3.5-2B and Qwen3-VL-4B-Instruct show that our proposed framework consistently outperforms rank-order, random, and REPLUG-style likelihood baselines under various alignment losses and pool size settings, suggesting that answer-level generator feedback is an effective supervision signal for preference alignment.

Preference-based fine-tuning methods such as RLHF and DPO require substantial compute and large preference datasets. They also need direct access to the model parameters which are not provided by many state-of-the art models. Inference-time alignment offers a cost-effective alternative without updating model parameters. However, existing inference-time methods rely on a scalar reward model derived under a Bradley-Terry assumption, which cannot represent general preferences. Following recent work on fine-tuning with generalized preferences, in this work, we initiate the study of inference-time alignment under general preferences. We formulate the problem as obtaining a Nash equilibrium of a two-player zero-sum game between policies. We propose two algorithms: Best-of-Nash (BoN) and Nash Mirror Descent (NMD). We prove that both algorithms achieve a duality gap that matches the problem lower bound. Empirically, we implement the two methods on three datasets, which shows that our methods substantially outperform the base policy, converging to the performance of the fine-tuned models. Moreover, our results show that NMD remains robust across the regularization parameter.

Ask a language model to respond "very excitedly," and its output is typically only mildly more energetic. We quantify this effect. We condition an instruction-tuned LLM on a continuous Valence-Arousal (VA) target, where valence measures how pleasant a state is and arousal how activated it is, measure the achieved affect with a frozen regressor, and sweep the requested target from -1 to +1. The response moves far less than asked: the gain, the slope of achieved against requested affect, is only 0.26 for valence and 0.13 for arousal on Llama-3.1-8B, where a faithful controller would score 1. The model systematically undershoots requested emotional intensity, which puts a number on the qualitative observation of Fazzi et al. (2025). Our experiments trace this to the preference-learning pipeline. Training targets from natural corpora such as EmoBank are neutral-heavy, and the sampled candidates themselves rarely reach extreme affect, so Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) is left with no extreme exemplar to prefer. If instead we cover the target space uniformly and sample a hotter, larger candidate pool, valence gain rises from 0.26 to 0.40 +/- 0.02 (3 seeds) and extrapolation error drops, at only a modest in-distribution cost (EmoBank-test VA distance 0.092 to 0.107). The same recipe reproduces on Qwen3-8B (gain_v 0.44, with in-distribution accuracy preserved). Arousal is harder and less reliable: its gain barely moves on average and swings across seeds (0.14 +/- 0.07, against valence's tight +/- 0.02), because raising arousal needs candidates the base model is reluctant to generate. The evidence indicates that faithful intensity is bottlenecked by the extremity of the candidate pool rather than by the conditioning format.

Research and news coverage of language-model deception increasingly attributes human-like mental-state concepts to language models. Such claims can blur the distinction between behavior that looks deceptive and a mechanism that is actually deceptive. We introduce a causal taxonomy separating prior commitment from retrospective report, model preference from realized output, false preference from sensitivity to the utility of misleading a recipient, and deceptive behavior from the provenance of the objective or strategy producing it. We test these distinctions in two open-weight model families. Across controlled guessing-game and stock-trading experiments, we find that deceptive-looking behavior can arise without the corresponding proposed mechanism, while other interventions provide direct evidence that recipient information state can causally affect deceptive preference. These results show that deceptive behavior can provide evidence for a deceptive mechanism. But even evidence for such a mechanism does not establish model agency in the deception.

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has emerged as a powerful yet sample-inefficient approach for learning reward models from human preferences, making active learning a critical component in synthesizing informative preference queries. However, effective uncertainty quantification required for active learning remains a key challenge for large neural network reward models. In this paper, we introduce PreferenceEKF, a sample-efficient approach that tracks reward model uncertainty by framing active preference learning as a sequential Bayesian filtering problem. Instead of relying on computationally prohibitive posterior inference over the full neural network parameter space, our method performs sequential inference via an extended Kalman filter within a low-dimensional parameter subspace, continuously updating the reward model posterior as new preference queries arrive. Our approach enables scalable sampling of neural network parameters to efficiently compute acquisition functions for active reward learning. Experiments on the D4RL and V-D4RL benchmarks demonstrate that our approach achieves better sample efficiency, runtime, scalability, and calibration compared to other Bayesian deep learning approaches, and the learned reward models lead to competitive offline reinforcement learning policy performance. This highlights the potential of scalable Bayesian methods for preference-based reward modeling in RLHF. Our code is available at https://github.com/yutaizhou/bnn_pref.

Current Large Language Models (LLMs) are primarily optimized for written text, often producing outputs that are grammatically correct and helpful yet poorly suited for spoken delivery via Text-to-Speech (TTS). In this work, we study how to make LLMs natively generate TTS-friendly text, which we frame as a preference alignment problem: instead of relying on downstream rewriting modules, we directly align LLMs to generate text optimized for spoken delivery. We introduce two preference datasets spanning different target domains, CORA and Recipe, which contain paired TTS-friendly and TTS-unfriendly responses. We further propose an evaluation suite combining a pattern-based heuristic metric, a TTS$\to$ASR evaluation pipeline, and a MUSHRA listening study with human judges. Our experiments compare the recently proposed Feature-aware Sampling and Tuning (FaST) framework -- leveraging interpretable features instead of a black-box reward model -- against an array of alignment baselines on the TTS-friendly generation task. Notably, we found that FaST achieves the best overall tradeoff between TTS-friendliness and helpfulness across various settings. We also identified a strong correlation between our different metrics, highlighting the ability to reliably assess TTS-friendliness via an efficient heuristic.

Sampling from distributions conditioned on desired semantic properties is an emerging challenge in modern generative modeling. Metropolis-Hastings (MH) provides a principled route to conditional sampling, but requires access to exact pointwise target-density evaluations, which are not available in generative settings. Meanwhile, pairwise comparisons by humans or model "judge" are highly accessible and have proved valuable across diverse applications. We introduce Pref-MH, a general exact MH sampler for judge-induced conditional distributions using only stochastic binary pairwise comparisons. Our key observation is that the MH unnormalized density ratio matches the preference odds of the Bradley-Terry (BT) choice model. The central challenge is that while MH requires precise ratio computation, BT judges provide only sampled binary feedback. To this end, we develop a valid accept/reject rule whose resulting Markov chain provably converges to the target distribution. We further show that, for a fixed proposal kernel and budget, Pref-MH is optimal in the Peskun-Tierney sense among this class of exact reversible acceptance rules. Experiments on text generation and molecular design with LLM judges, as well as image generation with VLM judges, demonstrate that Pref-MH provides a practical and flexible approach to conditional sampling when comparative feedback is relatively easy to obtain.

As one of the most critical challenges in large language models, contextual faithfulness directly determines their reliability in knowledge-intensive applications. This task is particularly challenging as it requires balancing factual consistency with generation efficiency. Contrastive decoding methods require dual forward passes (with and without context) to compare model outputs, doubling inference computational overhead, while post-training alignment demands extensive reinforcement learning with substantial computational overhead. To address this challenge, we present SFAD, a speculative decoding framework that enhances contextual faithfulness without inference degradation. We first construct ConFide, a preference dataset with fine-grained atomic perturbations, to train a context-faithful draft model via Direct Preference Optimization. During inference, Epistemic Friction detects potential hallucinations by quantifying distributional tension weighted by specialist certainty. When friction exceeds the threshold, Asymmetric Logit Steering refines the target distribution through residual-based logit injection; otherwise, standard speculation proceeds. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SFAD substantially improves faithfulness while achieving $2.48\times$ speedup, offering a practical solution for efficient LLMs.

Reward models trained on human preferences are known to suffer from length, formatting, and other stylistic biases. In this paper we use patterning, which reweights each preference pair according to its measured effect on posterior expectation values of benchmark losses (its susceptibility), to debias a Gemma 2 9B Instruct reward model trained on Skywork-Reward-Preference v0.2. We obtain $+14.2 \pm 1.2$ pp on RM-Bench Hard, the split where style cues point against correctness (mean $\pm$ s.e.\ over 5 seeds), with overall RM-Bench accuracy preserved, comparable to the strongest Hard-split gain reported by the closest published comparator (SteerRM, $+13.2$ pp). We demonstrate in a simple case that the reweighting is interpretable by tracing a side effect of the intervention (a regression on a safety subset of RM-Bench) to a small class of training pairs, which we confirm by ablation. The weights also transfer: those computed on Gemma 2 9B debias Gemma 2 2B and 27B with no recomputation, and transfer partially to Llama 3.1 8B. This is the first application of patterning, a program grounded in singular learning theory, beyond small models and synthetic tasks.

We investigate the role of conversational context modeling in user preference tracking for Conversational Recommendation Systems (CRSs). In this regard, we propose DREAMS, a novel tree-structured context modeling framework that explicitly captures user preference evolution throughout multi-turn interactions. DREAMS introduces two specialized node types to support the two fundamental objectives of CRSs: preference elicitation and preference exploitation. Specifically, elicitation nodes leverage Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to strategically explore conversational actions and infer latent user preferences, while exploitation nodes employ LLM-based refinement to transform the tracked preference state into structured retrieval queries for recommendation. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of DREAMS and its design.

Two-sided service marketplaces are moving from deterministic request-form intake to AI-native probabilistic matching, enabled by large language models (LLMs) that infer intent, preferences, and latent constraints from natural language. Relying on inferred intent rather than fixed-form fields forces these platforms to regenerate the provider-side preference taxonomy underwriting matching, search, and pricing: attributes interpretable to service providers while remaining a useful signal for marketplace decisions. We present an autoresearch loop that generates this taxonomy, one occupation at a time, and has been deployed in production at a major U.S. consumer services marketplace since April 2026, spanning 132 occupations. Instead of one global hierarchy, the loop treats each occupation as an independent generation problem and runs iterative propose-evaluate-keep refinement cycles. Each candidate tag set is scored by a recalibrated six-rubric LLM-as-judge framework, and a 7-critic panel of distinct personas contributes weighted penalties to an adjusted score, with no hard vetoes. A separate parity-mapping stage maps legacy request-form Q&A pairs back to the generated taxonomy, yielding both a coverage signal and an interface for human quality assurance; it does so by first inferring the provider attribute each legacy question was meant to measure, rather than translating questions to tags literally.

Adapting large language models to user-specific preferences is often constrained by the cost of human annotation, making preference optimisation impractical in low-resource settings where preferences cannot be reliably labelled by LLMs themselves, e.g., due to cultural, subjective, or personalised contexts. In this paper, we investigate how language models encode preference information in their intermediate representations, finding that activations from chosen and rejected responses form distinct clusters across layers, even in pretrained models. Strikingly, this structure is strengthened by alignment on canonical datasets but erased when the target preferences differ from those the model was aligned on, suggesting aligned LLMs are poor judges for non-mainstream populations. Exploiting this structure, we propose training a lightweight linear probe on a few labelled preference pairs ($\leq$500) and using it to annotate large unlabelled datasets (50K+) for downstream preference optimisation. We systematically evaluate this approach across different datasets, preference optimisation methods and model scales and find that our method consistently outperforms direct training given the same annotation budget, and remains competitive against baselines trained on $50-100\times$ more labelled data in the majority of our settings. Code is available at https://github.com/alessioGalatolo/activ-pref-probe.

Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) simplifies alignment through pairwise comparisons but assumes all observed preferences are reliable. Real data often violates this assumption, leading to reversed, weak, or ambiguous labels that cause harmful policy updates. To address this, we propose Posterior Label Correction DPO (PLC-DPO) to robustly optimize preferences by routing each pair's training signal as a clean, flip, or tie case. The key idea is to use the calibrated policy-reference margin as online evidence to take appropriate correction actions. This reframes noisy preference learning as actively correcting supervision direction and strength rather than merely filtering suspicious examples. Across 57 dataset-model-benchmark cells, PLC-DPO obtains the best mean win rate against DPO (60.5 vs. 55.5 for the next-best method). Injected-noise and tie stress tests, human disagreement analysis, and self-confirmation diagnostics further show that the routing remains stable and distinguishes flipped from weakly directional pairs.

Preference optimization is widely used to align large language models with human preferences, but preference-data composition may also influence privacy-relevant memorization. We examine whether adding synthetic privacy-preference pairs to Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) is associated with lower canary-based memorization signals without modifying the objective or introducing a formal privacy mechanism. We propose Privacy-Pressure Preference Mixing (P3M), a data-composition protocol that varies the amount of privacy-preference data while keeping helpfulness and harmlessness preference data fixed. We evaluate a non-privacy Baseline and privacy-mixing ratios of 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 using Gemma 3 270M-IT across five random seeds and validate the same four conditions using 4-bit-quantized Gemma 2 2B-IT across three seeds. Overall, under the tested conditions, privacy-preference mixing is associated with lower mean canary suffix log-likelihood proxy values across both model settings and lower aggregate membership-inference attack performance relative to the Baseline in the mixed-source 2B evaluation. Specifically, across the privacy-aware 2B configurations, the mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) ranges from 0.596 to 0.629, and the mean area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) ranges from 0.541 to 0.575, compared with 0.804 and 0.790, respectively, for the Baseline. However, the reduction in membership distinguishability does not hold uniformly across data sources. Moreover, the relationship between the privacy ratio and harmlessness preference accuracy varies by model setting, whereas helpfulness preference accuracy remains broadly stable. These findings suggest that P3M should be viewed as a lightweight empirical protocol for examining privacy-utility-safety trade-offs rather than as a formal privacy guarantee or a defense against extraction attacks.

We study learning a mixture of $k$ Plackett-Luce models from multi-way ranking responses from annotators that may represent heterogeneous underlying preferences. This problem has many applications in AI alignment and preference optimization. Prior work has studied mixtures of Bradley-Terry models from pairwise comparisons. However, estimating a mixture of multi-way ranking models can become theoretically unidentifiable when $k$ exceeds $m/2$, where $m$ is the ranking length. We design an efficient algorithm to address this issue by first augmenting the rankings to a larger size (e.g., generating comparisons from a base model), followed by a gradient-based estimation to reduce inference cost (in the input embedding space). With this procedure in mind, we then fit a mixture of Plackett-Luce (PL) models via an expectation-maximization-style iteration, or MoPLEx in short. We conduct extensive experiments to verify this algorithm. First, we find that the gradient-based approximation estimates true probabilities with less than 5% error on models with up to 34 billion parameters. Second, MoPLEx improves clustering and ranking accuracy by an average of 43.7% and 15.2% over baselines using a single PL model or a mixture of Bradley-Terry models, on UltraFeedback and PERSONA datasets. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of MoPLEx for tackling multi-way rankings following heterogeneous preferences through measuring alignment via gradients.

Neural combinatorial optimization (NCO) relies on parallel solution sampling for training, yet existing methods fail to fully exploit the rich information latent in a co-sampled solution group. Preference-optimization methods anchor on the single best solution and discard fine-grained quality and structural signal from all other peers-a failure we term gradient signal polarization. Mean-based baselines instead weight peers uniformly, so structurally near-identical peers flood the baseline with redundant information and keep gradient variance high-a failure we term baseline redundancy. We propose SSPO (Structure-Aware Similarity-Weighted Preference Optimization), which scores all $B$ sampled solutions jointly through a dissimilarity-weighted leave-one-out baseline: structurally distinct peers receive higher weight, resolving both failures in a single mechanism. The baseline uses zero-parameter, problem-adaptive solution embeddings built from the encoder's existing node representations. Experiments on TSP, EFL, and JSP benchmarks show consistent gains over prior best-anchor and uniform-weight baselines. A direct comparison against uniform RLOO on TSP and EFL confirms that structure-aware weighting is the primary driver of improvement. The SSPO-trained EFL policy has been deployed in a production facility-location system at JD$\mathord{.}$com, confirming practical viability at scale.

Developing dialogue systems capable of engaging in multi-turn, goal-oriented conversations remains a significant challenge, especially in specialized domains with limited data. This research proposes a novel framework called Preference Tree Optimization (PTO), designed to iteratively improve agent models in such dialogue systems, by generating preference data using a method called Preference Tree with Look-Ahead. Focusing on Motivational Interviewing (MI) -- a counseling technique aimed at facilitating behavioral change -- we leverage virtual patients and an oracle evaluator to simulate conversations and generate rich preference datasets. By combining this method with Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), we aim to enhance the agent's decision-making capabilities over iterative training cycles. The proposed framework addresses data scarcity and advances the development of more nuanced and effective dialogue systems in goal-oriented domains. Experimental evaluations demonstrate that the PTO framework enhances dialogue agents' performance in goal-oriented conversations within the domain of Motivational Interviewing (MI). Models trained with PTO consistently outperformed the baseline in key metrics such as session satisfaction and working alliance. Additionally, incorporating look-ahead simulations led to improved long-term planning and more effective conversational strategies, with deeper look-ahead configurations yielding the most stable and high-scoring results.

As users increasingly turn to Large Language Models (LLMs) for information and advice on political matters, particularly during election periods, the political preferences expressed by these systems have become a matter of public interest. Prior research has shown that interactions with LLMs can influence users' political attitudes and choices, raising questions about how these models themselves evaluate political actors. In this paper, we investigate whether and how LLMs express preferences toward political parties and political leaders. We introduce a systematic and reproducible auditing framework in which multiple LLMs are prompted to evaluate parties and leaders across nine criteria. Rather than attempting to infer the models' "true" political beliefs, we focus on their observable behavior, examining consistency across evaluations, differences between models, refusal rates, and sensitivity to prompt formulation. We further investigate how these evaluations vary when models are instructed to adopt different personas. We demonstrate the framework through an Italian case study, providing a systematic analysis of LLM-generated political evaluations on italian parties and leaders.

Cross-domain recommendation (CDR) transfers preference knowledge across related domains, but federated deployment makes cross-domain alignment difficult because the behavioral anchors that align item spaces, such as overlapping users and shared interaction signals, are often sparse, unavailable, or privacy-sensitive across clients. To address this tension, we revisit federated CDR as generation over a stable semantic item language. By representing items as discrete semantic ID (SID) sequences derived from public item-side metadata, cross-domain item alignment is induced by a shared vocabulary rather than by exchanging private interactions or aligning domain-specific embeddings. Directly federating SID-based generators, however, introduces two design constraints: the SID tokenizer must remain fixed to preserve cross-client token consistency, which creates a semantic-only bottleneck because local collaborative filtering (CF) signals cannot be globally shared or aligned; meanwhile, standard federated averaging can cause negative transfer under domain heterogeneity. To overcome these constraints, we propose FedCGR, a federated generative CDR framework that keeps the item language stable and makes adaptation explicit. FedCGR injects local CF evidence through a reliability-aware semantic interface and trains a prototype-personalized generator that selectively aggregates shared parameters according to domain relatedness while keeping domain-specific quantities local. Experiments on six Amazon cross-domain scenarios show that FedCGR consistently outperforms federated generative baselines and achieves competitive performance against strong sequential and federated CDR methods under both full-ranking and sampled evaluation protocols.

Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) aggregates token-level log-probability ratios via uniform summation, implicitly treating all tokens as contributing equally to the preference signal. However, the contribution of individual tokens to the preference signal varies. We introduce token credit, which modulates each token's KL regularization based on its contribution to the preference outcome. We derive that effective token credit is proportional to the magnitude of each token's implicit reward, and observe that this quantity evolves substantially during training. This implies that static token credit becomes increasingly misaligned as training progresses. In this work, we propose Se-DPO (Self-Evolving Token Credit for DPO), a live mechanism that derives token credit from the model's own evolving internal signals during DPO training. Since the reward signal varies in reliability across positions, Se-DPO calibrates token credit based on both the strength and the confidence of each token's contribution. Se-DPO requires no external models, adding only a lightweight calibration network with minimal computational overhead. Experiments show that Se-DPO improves over DPO by up to 9.8 points on AlpacaEval~2 and 12.2 points on Arena-Hard.

Natural language user preferences provide an interpretable interface for LLM personalization. However, universal preference summaries often contain information irrelevant to a particular downstream task. Directly supplying the full preference summary therefore wastes context capacity and introduces cross-task distraction, while manually designing task-specific preference views is difficult to scale. In this work, we study \emph{task-specific preference adaptation}: given a universal user preference summary and a downstream task, derive a task-conditioned representation that preserves sufficient decision-relevant evidence while removing redundant context. To this end, we propose \textsc{AlignXada}, a training-free meta-learning framework that induces reusable textual refinement policies for adapting universal preference summaries to task-specific ones. The refinement policy is iteratively optimized by a meta learner through verbal reinforcement learning. Across 13 tasks and three downstream models (39 task--model cells), \textsc{AlignXada} achieves an average gain of 3.82 points, improving 33 cells while retaining only 22.8% of the original profile tokens and outperforming RAG in 36 cells. An extended faithfulness analysis further shows that the refined profiles remain largely grounded in the source preferences while preserving task-relevant personalization signals, suggesting that profile-side adaptation serves as a practical complement to universal memory construction for lifelong personalized agents.

Recommendation systems thrive on personalization, where ''correctness'' is rarely a binary truth but a matter of subjective human preference. As Large Language Models (LLMs) are deployed as autonomous verifiers of safety and quality guidelines, they face a distinctive challenge: context-aware preference alignment. Recent gains in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) are indexed mostly on objective, mathematical tasks. Through a large-scale study spanning both proprietary and open-source models on four real-world verification tasks from a production recommender platform, we ask whether explicit reasoning generalizes to subjective, human-centric industry rubrics. We expose a fundamental vulnerability: rigid, math-centric reasoning traces actively degrade verification, and applying standard RLVR triggers a phenomenon we term reasoning collapse, in which the policy abandons deliberation in favor of rapid heuristic guessing. We introduce a conditional length-penalized post-training algorithm that intertwines verification accuracy with bounded reasoning length, halting collapse and recovering performance. Finally, we show that a reasoning trace's efficacy is tightly coupled with its socio-linguistic framing: across 1500 synthesized personas, verification accuracy swings by nearly 0.38 macro-F1 depending solely on the adopted reasoning persona---evidence that much subjective-verification error is really reasoning-style mismatch. This observation motivates a mid-training architecture that routes reasoning through contextually aligned personas. This work offers both a scalable algorithmic patch and a long-term architectural blueprint for aligning reasoning models with real-world subjective constraints.

Despite significant advances in Medical Report Generation (MRG), the reliability remains constrained by the prevalence of factual errors. While Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has emerged as a promising post-training paradigm to enhance the performance of Supervised Fine-Tuned (SFT) MRG models, existing DPO-based MRG methods typically adopt a naive preference construction that directly pairs model-generated reports with ground truth reports. This strategy inadvertently entangles critical clinical findings with clinically irrelevant linguistic characteristics, and fundamentally lacks explicit vision-language alignment. To address these challenges, we propose DPO-Clin, a novel post-training framework that focuses preference optimization on clinical findings and cross-modal alignment. First, we introduce the Entity-level Clinical Diagnostic (ECD) module to perform a precise entity-level factual diagnosis. ECD guides the generation of linguistically-aligned report preference pairs, isolating clinical discrepancies from linguistic variations. Second, to achieve fine-grained cross-modal alignment, we develop M2DPO, a retrieval-augmented multi-modal DPO variant that enforces textual preference inversion triggered by visual context switches. Third, we locate correct yet highly uncertain predicted entities and apply counterfactual modifications to construct targeted preference data for latent risk mitigation, thereby further enhancing the model reliability. Extensive experiments on two public chest X-ray datasets (MIMIC-CXR and IU X-Ray) and an in-house endoscopy dataset demonstrate that DPO-Clin significantly improves the SFT baselines on clinical-aware metrics. Furthermore, it achieves superior performance over existing DPO-based MRG methods, exhibiting robust generalizability across distinct baseline architectures and diverse medical imaging modalities.

Generative AI is shifting digital commerce from browsing toward agentic search, in which consumers delegate product discovery to AI agents. We compare manual search, which accurately evaluates a limited product set, with agentic search, which screens a broad catalog through noisy representations of preferences and products. Preference complexity is the number of satisfaction-relevant dimensions that are difficult to articulate before search but readily evaluated upon inspection. Consumers have finite attention and choose search intensity: products inspected manually or preference-refinement depth with an agent. We obtain three findings. First, manual search collapses beyond a finite complexity threshold: inspection ceases, mismatch reaches the no-search benchmark, and platform revenue falls to zero. Agentic search avoids this collapse. Once refinement becomes worthwhile, it remains worthwhile as complexity rises; mismatch stays below the no-search benchmark and revenue remains positive, although articulation effort and mismatch may increase. Second, platforms rank the regimes by conversion revenue, whereas consumers also bear search expenditure. When manual inspection is sufficiently inexpensive, agentic search becomes revenue-superior before consumers voluntarily adopt it, creating an adoption lag in which consumers rationally continue manual search. Third, conditional on agentic participation, platforms may assign lower fidelity to consumers with larger attention budgets because they can offset noisier representations through additional refinement, yielding an inverted fidelity allocation. Agentic commerce thus shifts scarcity from product inspection to preference articulation, making consumers' willingness and ability to interact central to voluntary use and platform fidelity design.

Multi-organ ultrasound segmentation remains challenging when anatomically adjacent structures must be delineated jointly, as localized boundary errors can persist even when Dice scores are high. To address these challenges, we propose Boundary-Adaptive Prompting for Multi-Organ Segmentation (BAP-MOS), a closed-loop adaptive prompting framework. BAP-MOS formulates prompt selection as an organ-specific multi-armed bandit problem over box, point, and combined prompts. An outer Tree-structured Parzen Estimator (TPE) loop selects the prompt-selection parameter vector, while an inner UCB-Tuned loop adapts per-organ prompt preferences during fine-tuning using a bounded Dice--MSD--HD95 validation-probe reward. The framework further introduces an organ-scaled negative prompt ring to adapt sparse prompt geometry across anatomical scales, while keeping the image and prompt encoders frozen and updating only the mask decoder. We evaluate BAP-MOS on pooled prostate-region TRUS cohorts against U-Net, nnU-Net, MedSAM, fixed-prompt SAM/MedSAM, and adaptive policy variants. On this benchmark, BAP-MOS achieves Dice 0.982, HD95 0.482, and MSD 0.204, reducing HD95 by approximately 48% and MSD by 45% relative to the strongest conventional baseline. To verify the generalization ability of the framework, we tested it on the external PFUS1 pelvic-floor ultrasound corpus using MedSAM and its adaptive strategy variants, and the results were good. These results support adaptive prompt allocation as an effective mechanism for improving boundary-sensitive multi-organ ultrasound segmentation without modifying the foundation-model backbone. Source Code is available at: https://github.com/SatvikPraveen/BAP-MOS

Token-level collaboration allows a large language model (LLM) to assist a small language model (SLM) when their predictions diverge. Existing methods either use LLM-generated intervention tokens or rank candidates with the LLM's next-token probabilities. Both rely on the LLM's local preference, even though an LLM-selected token may be difficult for the SLM to build on. We present FutureBridge, which ranks joint LLM-SLM token candidates according to how well they support the SLM's subsequent reasoning. During training, an answer-verified LLM trajectory supplies a fixed shared future, and a frozen SLM evaluates every candidate under this common context. The resulting counterfactual scores supervise a lightweight token reranker that observes only the current state and candidate token. At inference, FutureBridge uses the LLM only to expand the candidate pool, selects one token, and returns generation to the SLM without generating or appending a future suffix. Across five mathematical reasoning benchmarks, FutureBridge improves the Qwen3-1.7B SLM's Math Avg. by 35.1% relative to greedy SLM decoding. These results indicate that token selection benefits from modeling whether the receiving SLM can use each candidate to continue reasoning, rather than relying on the LLM's local preference alone.

Diffusion models have strong generative capabilities. However, their maximum likelihood training objective only focuses on reconstructing the data distribution, making it difficult to align with specific preferences. Reinforcement learning (RL) for preference alignment in diffusion models is promising but limited by reward sparsity. Since a single reward cannot support optimization, existing RL methods usually backpropagate the final reward to all previous steps. However, denoising is stage-wise, with distinct semantics and controllability. Repeating the final reward across all steps creates a temporal objective mismatch, encouraging reward shortcuts that lead to reward hacking. At the same time, due to reward backfilling, each time step receives the same reward, making it impossible to distinguish between actions, thereby weakening the optimization process. To resolve this issue, we propose Stage-Guided Per-Step Optimization (SGPO) for diffusion models, which jointly leverages signal-to-noise ratio and semantic changes to identify generation stages and adaptively assign stage-specific objectives. Early denoising is chaotic and far from the final reward, resulting in weak reward-behavior correlation. This stage should prioritize exiting the chaotic state. In the mid stage, the latent transitions to a stable structure, where the final reward better corresponds to generative behavior. Therefore, this stage optimizes the final reward while exploring diversity to avoid early convergence to a single mode. In the late stage, the latent's core structure is largely fixed, and preference optimization mainly amplifies local details, risking overfitting. Therefore, stable convergence is preferred to avoid quality degradation. Results from 16 comparative experiments validate SGPO. Our method achieves 26.7% average gains in generative quality and 36.7% higher convergence speed.

Large language models can infer sensitive personal attributes, such as age, location, and occupation, from ordinary text, turning everyday writing into a privacy risk. Adversarial anonymization defends against this by rewriting a text with a capable language model that also plays the attacker, but it needs a powerful model at inference time and thus sends private text to a third party, the very exposure anonymization should prevent. Recent work distills this behavior into a small on-device model using supervised fine-tuning and direct preference optimization (DPO), but DPO only imitates the teacher's offline choices and never directly optimizes the privacy--utility objective we care about. We introduce \textbf{GRASP} (\textbf{G}roup-\textbf{R}elative \textbf{A}nonymization via \textbf{S}elf-refinement \textbf{P}olicy-optimization), which reinforces the local anonymizer online with Group Relative Policy Optimization. A single small model acts as anonymizer, adversary, and utility judge, trained against a self-generated reward that hides attributes while preserving meaning, with a design that guards against reward hacking. Trained on Llama-3.1-8B, \ours{} improves the privacy--utility trade-off over the DPO-distilled baseline, consistently across three independent LLM judges. Against adversarial anonymization driven by frontier models such as Gemini2.5Flash and Claude, it achieves a comparable or better overall trade-off while removing substantially more private information, and it runs entirely on-device at roughly $1\%$ of the GPT-4o teacher's cost.

Language models increasingly condition their answers on external signals, and a single misleading one can turn a correct answer wrong. The obvious remedy, training models to resist such signals, hides a failure mode: a model that ignores all context looks robust yet is useless when the context is worth trusting. We recast the problem as selective trust and introduce MIST, a human-annotated benchmark that renders each reasoning item under four matched conditions (clean, misleading, correct-context, and irrelevant-context), together with SC2W, a paired metric counting how often a misleading signal flips a clean-correct answer to wrong. Across a comprehensive benchmark study, we observe that such a susceptibility is universal. We then propose SCOPE, which mines clean-correct/misleading-wrong failures and optimizes a standard Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) objective over matched preference pairs balanced equally across all four conditions, rather than over misleading items alone. Our approach substantially reduces SC2W on popular open-sourced models while preserving accuracy when the added context is clean, correct, or irrelevant. With this work, we argue that models should be judged on selective trust, not on resistance alone.

Latent reward models can supervise visual diffusion models without decoding intermediate states into pixel space. This makes alignment with human preferences more efficient. However, existing latent reward models output only scalar scores. They do not estimate the uncertainty of each prediction. The generator therefore cannot determine which feedback is reliable. This can drive optimization in the wrong direction and lead to reward hacking. We propose \textsc{SURE}, a unified latent-space framework for image and video diffusion models. It learns reward distributions and directly uses their reliability to guide dense post-training. First, we propose sample-adaptive latent reward model (\textsc{SURE-LRM}). It predicts a Gaussian utility for each noisy latent. Its mean predicts the reward score. Its variance reflect the uncertainty of prediction without human annotation. The learned distribution then guides post-training through uncertainty-guided reward feedback learning (\textsc{SURE-REFL}). This method provides uncertainty-guided dense feedback along the denoising trajectory. At selected transitions, \textsc{SURE-REFL} queries the frozen \textsc{SURE-LRM}. It converts detached variance into reliability weights for samples at the same transition. Each weighted reward is backpropagated only through its local transition. The entire process remains in latent space and requires neither pixel-space decoding nor the full denoising graph. Experiments show that \textsc{SURE-LRM} improves preference prediction over strong baselines. \textsc{SURE-REFL} achieves the sota performance among various metrics and further improves optimization stability. It also achieves the highest VBench quality, semantic, and total scores among the evaluated methods.

Large language models (LLMs) have been shown to exhibit strong Python preferences when generating project-level code, but there is currently no systematic way to measure this behaviour across new models. To bridge this gap, we introduce LangChoiceBench, a project-level code-generation benchmark for measuring Python preference, recommendation-implementation consistency, and language diversity. LangChoiceBench covers 28 projects across seven software areas where Python is often a poor default. We evaluate 25 diverse LLMs and find that Python remains heavily over-selected, recommendation-implementation consistency is low, and smaller open-weight models generally show stronger Python preference and lower language diversity. We further analyse 9,826 reasoning traces and find that most Python choices are automatic or driven primarily by ease, rather than explicit consideration of project requirements. In a smaller but important set of cases, models fabricate contextual support for choosing Python - a failure mode we call phantom evidence - or produce code that contradicts the language selected in their own reasoning.

Personalizing language models (LMs) to individual user preferences is essential for aligning responses with diverse goals and backgrounds. Existing methods typically train a separate adapter for each user or learn a reward model whose scores depend on the user. Despite explicitly optimizing for each user, these methods must learn from limited observations and therefore suffer from data sparsity and poor generalization to unseen users and domains. In-context learning (ICL) and Context Steering (CoS) can instead provide more effective personalization by conditioning the base LM directly on user context and leveraging its pretrained capabilities without per-user training. Yet neither adapts the influence of that context across decoding steps: ICL leaves it uncontrolled, whereas CoS applies a fixed steering coefficient and requires two LM forward passes per step. We propose Cautious Context Steering (CCS), which adds a lightweight adapter to a frozen backbone LM to decide at each token whether and how strongly user context should affect generation. The adapter learns this behavior from an oracle context-conditioned LM and preserves the base LM when the context is not helpful. A single CCS adapter trained on only one dataset improves generation quality both in-domain and across four out-of-distribution personalization benchmarks, demonstrating robust generalization to new users and domains. CCS also avoids per-user fine-tuning and the additional context-conditioned forward pass required by CoS, substantially reducing inference cost.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) for radiology report generation are typically trained on retrospective clinical reports, which suffer from omission noise: clinically present findings are left unreported due to the omission of subtle findings. For example, prior studies show that cardiomegaly may be omitted from ICU chest X-ray reports when the imaging request is focused on monitoring support device placement. As a result, models trained with standard approaches inherit these omissions, learning to under-report findings themselves. We propose PU-DPO, a preference optimization framework to prevent omission noise from corrupting the preference signal. We reformulate the objective under a positive-unlabeled (PU) learning framework, treating absent mentions as unlabeled rather than truly negative. Our framework provides preference supervision using constructed contrastive pairs, generated using edits to model responses, producing variants that explicitly mention or omit a specific finding. Generated responses that mention the finding are naturally preferred in the context of visual evidence. Across semi-synthetic experiments and analyses on real-world chest radiograph benchmarks where adjudicated labels are available, PU-DPO yields consistent gains in detection rates and recovery of hidden positives across multiple pathologies, and is more robust to omission noise than prior approaches.

Biological systems must regulate competing needs under limited perceptual bandwidth, where sharpening one estimate costs the capacity to sharpen the others. Any fixed-budget system therefore has to decide where to allocate its perceptual precision. We study this in a foraging agent that must keep several bodily needs satisfied to survive, modelled with active inference. At each step it reads its own body-state beliefs, identifies the most-needed channel, and reallocates a fixed budget of interoceptive precision toward it, so that the same precision-shaped likelihood feeds both belief update and planning. In AffectWorld, a four-channel foraging gridworld, this selective allocation more than doubles learning-phase survival at matched budget against a uniform-precision agent ($0.414$ vs $0.199$ across 11 layouts, $n{=}32$ seeds each, paired cluster-bootstrap $p \leq 10^{-4}$). Two further results sharpen the mechanism. The benefit runs through planning as well as perception, since denying the shaped likelihood to the planner alone removes about half of it. It is also need-aligned, since aiming precision at the least-needed channel does worse than spreading it evenly. The attended channel additionally learns its own dynamics about twice as fast, and stays ahead even at matched observation count, a behavioural trace of the same precision routing, visible in learning speed, not survival.

We convert 21 of 28 full-attention layers of Qwen3-0.6B-Base into KDA (Kimi Delta Attention) linear-attention layers on a single consumer-grade GPU budget, and ask a simple question: what exactly does the conversion break? After surgery, hidden-state alignment and end-to-end KL distillation drive the student close to its teacher in perplexity, yet multiple-choice accuracy stays near random chance (25-29% vs. the teacher's 50.6% on C-Eval). Using a four-permutation diagnostic that rotates answer options while holding content fixed, we show the model sticks to option labels (predicting "A" 81% of the time; 106/161 questions keep the same label under all four rotations) rather than following answer content -- an interface injury that standard distillation metrics cannot see. A 1,000-step format-targeted completion-only KL stage repairs the interface (+12.48 points on C-Eval, label-stickiness roughly halved), after which persona SFT and one round of on-policy DPO preserve benchmark scores within noise. We release code, weights, recipes, and the full audit trail, and distill the engineering lessons -- including an FP32-master failure mode in which bf16 optimizer updates are silently swallowed -- that made convergence possible at this budget.

As large language model (LLM) agents evolve into personalized companions, memory has emerged as a core capability. However, LLMs face a knowledge utilization problem: they may fail to act on relevant user preferences even when they are fully present in context. When an agent fails to tailor its response in a context where previously shared user preferences should matter, it is unclear whether the model failed to remember that information or remembered it but failed to use it. To isolate this breakdown, we introduce a decoupled evaluation paradigm that administers paired Know and Act tests to the same user preference. We conduct large-scale experiments across 16 systems and five memory architectures, evaluating 1,000 preferences embedded at three levels of expression strength. Our results show a large gap between Know and Act outcomes: agents often pass the recall test for a user preference but fail to reflect that same preference in the paired behavioral scenario. While memory architectures reduce this gap, utilization remains especially weak for health and therapy-related preferences, where failures to act carry the greatest real-world stakes.

Discrete choice modeling is a common tool used for preference elicitation during policy-making, but this is typically done through parametric models. Machine learning can push the boundaries of discrete choice modeling for policy-based preference elicitation by adopting a data-driven approach or learning individual preferences. However, there is limited knowledge of how well machine learning methods can estimate individual discrete choice rules under individual heterogeneity, especially in the context of challenges often experienced during preference elicitation. This study evaluates four machine learning models (multinomial logistic regression, generalized additive model, twinned neural network, and Gaussian process) with respect to their capacity to learn and predict five choice rules that are important in the behavioral and social sciences (linear strong utility, monotonic strong utility, ideal point, lexicographic semiorder, and multiattribute linear ballistic accumulator). Monte Carlo experiments were performed to assess model performance when increasing a) the number of attributes in the choice alternatives, b) the number of training choice sets, and c) the choice rule's determinism. The simulation results demonstrated that semi-parametric and non-parametric models generally outperform parametric models across all choice rules and experimental contexts. Model performance also generally improves by 6% to 96% and 0% to 55%, respectively, with an increase in training choice sets and choice rule determinism. A case study using real energy policy preference data was also conducted, where TNN performed best with a BIC of 13.351. This work demonstrated the viability and limitations of semi-parametric and non-parametric models in the context of policy-centric discrete choice modeling and showed how the choice task context should drive model selection.

In Motivational Interviewing (MI), a client's sustain talk (arguments for the status quo) calls for the counselor to roll with resistance, a move that can fail in two opposite ways: capitulation (abandoning the change agenda to preserve rapport) or confrontation (arguing or directing, overriding the client's autonomy). We introduce a two-axis evaluation of counselor responses, anchored in the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (MITI) code, Goal Persistence (GP) and Relational Attunement (RA), yielding a four-quadrant framing in which rolling with resistance is high on both, and we ask whether penalizing one failure through preference optimization teaches rolling with resistance or provokes its opposite. From the expert-annotated AnnoMI corpus we build topic-disjoint Direct Preference Optimization data whose preference sets differ only in which failure is rejected, using on-policy negatives. An automatic judge, validated against AnnoMI's expert labels and rechecked by trained human coders, scores blind pairwise win-rates against each base under a firewall in which disjoint model families generate, label, and judge. Across three aligned instruction models spanning the Qwen and Llama families, penalizing confrontation reliably lowers goal persistence below parity, on every base and in every seed run, a robust cost, whereas the attunement gain is base-dependent, present on two of the three bases but absent on the third. Penalizing capitulation is inert, because these models rarely capitulate on-policy, so the trade is gated by each base's failure profile. A prompt-only control raises attunement without the goal-persistence cost, locating the cost in the optimization rather than in attunement itself.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly required to integrate multiple sources of information that may be inconsistent or conflicting. However, there is still a lack of controllable and attributable methods for analyzing how models resolve conflicts between competing specifications. We propose a controlled experimental framework for studying model preferences under conflicting specifications. By constructing specifications with explicit conflicts, the framework enables model choices between competing specifications to be directly observed and analyzed. A symmetry-based design further reduces confounding factors, allowing preferences across representation types to be compared systematically. We evaluate the framework on an executable mathematical benchmark with 550 conflict instances spanning 11 function families, comparing four representation types: pure natural language, formal language, naturalized formal language, and input--output examples. Results show systematic preference patterns rather than random behavior, with a consistent ordering: $\text{Formal} \approx \text{Naturalized Formal} > \text{Pure Natural Language} > \text{Input--Output Examples}$. Example effects further depend on model capability and function family. We extend the framework to heterogeneous specification conflicts in Boolean algebra, code generation, and the clinical domain, demonstrating its applicability across diverse tasks and specification forms. The framework provides a unified approach for measuring how LLMs resolve conflicts between competing sources of information.

Recent advances in preference alignment for diffusion-based video generation, particularly via Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), have significantly improved visual quality. However, temporally sparse artifacts such as motion collapse, object flickering, and color oversaturation remain a major barrier to perceptual realism. Existing methods struggle with these issues due to two key limitations: (1) the preference attribution bottleneck, where offline human annotations are costly and fail to accurately capture learning dynamics, while online reward signals are rollout-aware but often unstable and biased; and (2) temporal credit misallocation, where uniformly applied supervision cannot effectively target the brief segments in which artifacts occur. To address these challenges, we propose concentrated Implicit Preference Optimization (cIPO), a post-training framework for video diffusion models. cIPO derives implicit preference signals directly from the denoising process: given a real video, the model adds forward noise and reconstructs it via iterative denoising, treating the original as the preferred sample and the reconstruction as the dispreferred one. This formulation captures inference-time errors without requiring human annotations or external reward models. Moreover, frame-level discrepancies between original and reconstructed videos reveal when failures occur. cIPO leverages this by computing temporal reconstruction errors and concentrating optimization on high-error segments, enabling more precise correction of failure-prone regions. Extensive experiments demonstrate that cIPO consistently enhances video authenticity and temporal coherence across multiple datasets, highlighting the effectiveness and efficiency of implicit preference with temporally concentrated optimization.

Comparative feedback, asking people which of two behaviors they prefer, has become a standard way to align robot and agent behavior with human intent when the reward itself cannot be specified directly. Preference-based reward learning typically casts the human teacher as a passive oracle answering learner-generated queries. We argue this forfeits the teacher's defining advantage: knowledge of the objective. A teacher who knows the target can construct training examples more efficiently than any learner-driven acquisition strategy, an advantage that widens as the reward's feature dimension grows. However, exploiting this advantage requires an accurate model of what the learner currently knows. We therefore recast preference learning as a human-autonomy team problem coupling two behavioral models: the teacher maintains a model of the learner to design an informative curriculum, and the learner maintains a second-order model of the teacher's model, emitting structured preference constraints (understanding statements) that keep the teacher's model of the learner synchronized. In simulation, an informed teacher outperforms learner-led selection; teacher-model drift under alternating teachers erodes this advantage; and understanding statements repair it, with second-order (ToM-2) statements outperforming mean-belief statements when the teacher's error about the learner is concentrated in a particular direction rather than spread evenly.

While data synthesis for large language models (LLMs) is prevalent, it primarily targets domains with verifiable answers, overlooking open-ended humanities and social sciences (HSS), where nuanced quality judgments matter more than objective correctness. This makes preference alignment a natural paradigm for broad HSS tasks. Yet existing methods are either costly or not tailored to broad HSS disciplines. We thus propose BridgeAlign, among the first preference-alignment pipelines for broad HSS disciplines, with three phases: i) Seed Curation: curating HSS seed documents from web corpora via heuristic/LLM-based filtering and text refinement; ii) Preference Data Synthesis: generating preference triplets via persona-based instruction inversion with Q&A consistency checks; iii) Preference Optimization: moving beyond naive human-vs-model heuristics by first grounding preferences in HSS quality rubric, then generating transitional responses via controlled quality degradation to form near-boundary preference pairs for finer-grained quality discrimination. Aligning over 210k synthetic preference samples, BridgeAlign enables Qwen3-8B to achieve the best average across 17 benchmarks against 11 strong baselines; importantly, leading on both human-preference and knowledge-based capabilities at once, with no trade-off between them, as supported by extensive experiments and contextualized by existing theories.

Entity linking in tables matches short and ambiguous cell mentions to their corresponding knowledge-base entities. Existing approaches typically rely on data preprocessing pipelines that retain either compact or extensive table content as contextual evidence, and then formulate entity linking as a language generation task for instruction-tuned models; recent systems further incorporate explicit reasoning to disambiguate challenging mentions. However, their training supervision is usually static: fixed preference data cannot adapt to the residual errors of an evolving model, while variations in reasoning length can bias sequence-level preference learning. To address these limitations, we present TELLER: Table Entity Linking through Learning from Errors and Reasoning. We first retrieve and rank Wikidata candidates and retain reduced table evidence in the prompt. The direct-answer path applies iterative direct preference optimization and refreshes its preference data with residual errors from the updated model. The reasoning path uses filtered and compressed chain-of-thought rationales for supervised fine-tuning, followed by our iterative length-normalized regularized preference optimization. On the TableInstruct entity-linking subset, the direct-answer path improves accuracy from 94.35% to 94.50%; on the MammoTab V2 evaluation set, it improves accuracy from 87.59% to 88.20%. The reasoning path improves accuracy from 92.90% to 92.95% on TableInstruct and from 79.09% to 81.85% on MammoTab V2, while maintaining high rates of complete reasoning generation. These results show that iterative preference learning benefits both concise entity prediction and explicit reasoning.

Sequence labeling is a fine-grained information extraction task, yet existing large language model-based approaches suffer from insufficient domain alignment and low inference efficiency. To address these issues, we propose DIRECT, a framework that addresses these issues through training-time optimization and inference-time rectification. Specifically, DIRECT performs Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) after supervised fine-tuning to strengthen task alignment with human preferences, and introduces a controlled decoding process that enforces fixed output formats and restricts predictions to candidate sets. To further improve efficiency, a template-filling mechanism requires the model to generate only label tokens while reusing prefixed content through the KV Cache, thus reducing redundant computation. Experimental results on eight datasets demonstrate that DIRECT achieves significant improvements in both performance and efficiency compared to existing methods.

Inference-time thinking improves the performance of large language models, but aggregate outcomes do not reveal whether models use available evidence more effectively or seek information that could improve future decisions. We distinguish these responses by measuring action preference, thinking length, and reported confidence under matched uncertainty. Ten open-weight models completed matched horizon-style two-armed bandit trials in thinking and non-thinking modes. A cognitive model separated value-guided action and uncertainty-independent choice noise from two behavioral signatures of exploration: a UCB-like preference for the less-known arm and Thompson-like choice variability that increases with total uncertainty. On average, thinking strengthened value-guided action and reduced uncertainty-independent choice noise, without producing UCB-like exploration or strengthening Thompson-like exploration. Outside action, the information-imbalanced history condition, which also displayed more observations than the matched balanced condition, was associated with greater thinking length. Reported confidence became more sensitive to decision difficulty and more strongly associated with chosen task evidence. We interpret these thinking-length and reported-confidence patterns as consistent with metacognitive control and metacognitive monitoring, respectively, without establishing either process. Decoder sweeps, especially temperature, altered choice noise and thinking length but did not reproduce the joint cross-output pattern. In this controlled decision setting, thinking improved how models acted on current evidence, while neither measured signature supported a shift toward a more information-seeking policy.

Personalizing large language models (LLMs) to individual users is essential for improving user experience, yet existing approaches typically rely on explicit preference supervision such as pairwise comparisons or demographic attributes, limiting their applicability in natural interaction settings. We propose IRIS, a framework that learns dynamic user personas directly from implicit interaction streams by extracting behavioral signals from everyday conversations and iteratively refining persona representations through a prediction-driven closed loop without requiring explicit feedback. We introduce an evaluation protocol based on behavior prediction, persona stability, and decision prediction. A proof-of-concept study on a synthetic interaction stream derived from public-domain autobiographical text shows that IRIS produces stable personas and distinguishes individual users while revealing limitations of memory-only approaches on recall-oriented metrics. We then validate IRIS on anonymized real-world Reddit r/AmItheAsshole (AITA) data, with personas built solely from each author's historical interactions. Across 100 authors, IRIS achieves the highest decision prediction accuracy among all evaluated methods (61.0%), outperforming static personas, memory-only retrieval, and no-personalization baselines. These results suggest that implicit behavioral modeling provides a scalable alternative to explicit preference learning for personalized LLMs and offers a practical foundation for adaptive conversational systems and embodied agents that require continuously evolving models of their users.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly controlled through system prompts that specify roles, formats, and safety requirements. However, models follow these prompts only implicitly through in-context learning, which can be insufficient for complex or compositional prompts. Existing approaches often require model tuning or response-level reranking, limiting their practicality for lightweight inference-time control. We introduce SyRuP, a decoding-time framework for improving system-prompt adherence while keeping the base LM frozen. SyRuP trains a cross-attention reward head from system-prompt-conditioned preference pairs, treating the system prompt as a separate memory to produce token-level adherence scores. At inference, SyRuP reranks the base LM's top-k candidates by combining base logits with both the learned reward signal and a contrastive signal that captures system-induced logit shifts. Experiments on system-prompt following benchmarks show that SyRuP consistently outperforms prompting and decoding-time baselines with moderate inference overhead. These results suggest that explicit token-level guidance is an effective and practical mechanism for reliable system-prompt following.