Direct Preference Optimization

Large language model reasoning is often treated as a monolithic capability, relying on binary preference supervision that fails to capture partial progress or fine-grained reasoning quality. We introduce continuous utility direct preference optimization (CU-DPO), a framework that aligns models to a portfolio of prompt-based cognitive strategies by replacing binary labels with continuous scores that capture fine-grained reasoning quality. We prove that learning with K strategies yields a Theta(K log K) improvement in sample complexity over binary preferences and that DPO converges to the entropy-regularized utility-maximizing policy. To exploit this signal, we propose a two-stage pipeline: (i) strategy selection, which optimizes the model to choose the best strategy via best-vs-all comparisons, and (ii) execution refinement, which trains correct execution using margin-stratified pairs. The framework is domain-agnostic: any task admitting cognitively distinct solution strategies and a decomposable continuous utility signal can be incorporated into the portfolio. On mathematical reasoning benchmarks, CU-DPO improves strategy selection accuracy from 35-46% to 68-78% across seven base models, yielding downstream reasoning gains of up to +6.6 points on in-distribution datasets with effective out-of-distribution transfer. CU-DPO demonstrates consistent gains on code generation and causal reasoning benchmarks, confirming generalization beyond the mathematical domain.

Preference-based post-training shapes language-model behavior, but safer outputs do not reveal how that change is represented internally or how firmly it persists under direct intervention. This matters for open-weight models, where an actor with white-box access can manipulate internal representations at inference without touching parameters. Using Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), we ask whether the safety behavior it introduces becomes deeply embedded or stays accessible to targeted activation-space interventions. We introduce D-STEER, an audit of two matched instruction-tuned and harmlessness-DPO pairs: OpenHermes-2.5-Mistral-7B and Llama-3-8B OpenHermes. D-STEER derives layer-local directions from differences in matched prompt activations, adds them to the instruction-tuned model to install the DPO-associated safety change and subtracts them from the DPO model to remove it, with separate operating windows distinguishing behavioral control from degradation. On held-out HarmfulQA, all four interventions shift harmful enablement as intended and exceed norm-matched random controls; Mistral installation recovers 98% of the endpoint gap and the other three arms recover 46-50%. The intended direction transfers to HH-RLHF and AdvBench under frozen coefficients, although usable operating windows do not transfer universally. An independently rebuilt implementation reproduces the bidirectional pattern on the Mistral pair under different construction and intervention choices. A meaningful component of DPO-induced safety behavior therefore remains controllable through compact inference-time intervention, with the extent depending on the checkpoint pair and the steering implementation.

Long-context dialogue systems suffer from state inertia, where models over-attend to history and fail to adapt to evolving intents. We demonstrate that standard alignment methods like DPO and even recent long-context optimization techniques struggle to resolve this without incurring a severe contextual alignment tax--a substantial perplexity surge caused by disrupting pre-trained priors. To address this, we propose DZ-TiDPO, a minimally invasive framework that synergizes conflict-aware optimization (during training) with a structural temporal attention bias. This design effectively decouples state updating from general linguistic modeling. Experiments on Multi-Session Chat and our new Inertia Challenge (IC-Bench) show DZ-TiDPO preserves structural coherence while resolving inter-turn conflicts. Crucially, our framework supports dual inference strategies: a negligible-latency static mode for general robustness and a precision-focused dynamic mode for micro-semantic conflicts. Furthermore, our scaling analysis reveals a capacity-stability trade-off, confirming that highly capable mid-sized models (7B) can efficiently internalize temporal alignment. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/lyj20071013/DZ-TiDPO.

Negative learning has never been more important than it is today, particularly in large language model (LLM) fine-tuning, where it underpins machine unlearning, preference- and reward-based optimization, and exploratory data generation. Yet its functional role remains a subject of ongoing debate, with existing work variously characterizing it as forgetting, regularization, or target shaping. However, analytical support focuses primarily on the single-update scale, while empirical results at the trajectory scale are typically obtained under negative-only training and may not extend to composite objectives in which it interacts with other components. To develop a deeper understanding, we introduce a gradient-based endpoint probing framework that can examine negative updates separately throughout training. Our analysis reveals that negative learning plays different roles across algorithms and training phases. For example, in off-policy DPO, it acts more like a regularizer early in training and shows evidence of target shaping only toward out-of-distribution endpoints and only in later phases. In on-policy PPO and GRPO, by contrast, negative updates offset endpoint-aligned positive learning without stable target shaping, consistent with a role in sustaining exploration. Guided by these findings, we develop a family of stage-aware methods that modulate the strength of negative updates throughout training, improving fine-tuning performance across tasks.

Preference tuning typically distributes adapter updates across every Transformer layer. We study how the placement of a fixed LoRA budget affects Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). Hierarchical Alignment partitions decoder depth into Local, Intermediate, and Global regions and restricts LoRA updates to a chosen contiguous block. Across Qwen and Llama models, three-seed sliding-window sweeps reveal broad low-loss basins around intermediate depth. Under exact trainableparameter matching, Middle achieves lower held-out DPO loss than an all-depth allocation on Qwen2.5-7B and Llama-3.1-8B. Generationlevel evidence is more variable. LLM judges and a blinded human study leave Selected versus All unresolved on Qwen; on Llama, two pairwise judges favor All while the human interval includes zero. Trained-adapter interventions show that learned depth components affect the optimization objective; removing the Llama Selected window also lowers generation quality. Across Qwen2.5 at 3B, 7B, and 14B, Middle versus All remains unresolved under Qwen3-Max; at 3B and 14B, both improve over Base. In our implementation, Middle also uses less peak memory and takes shorter steps than a parameter-matched all-depth allocation. Together, the results support intermediate depth as a practical starting point for fixed-budget preference tuning, though the best window and its behavioral value still need per-setting validation.

Margin-based optimization is fundamental to improving generalization and robustness in classification tasks. In the context of reward model learning from preferences within Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), existing methods typically rely on no margins, fixed margins, or margins that are simplistic functions of preference ratings. However, such formulations often fail to account for the varying strengths of different preferences or they rely on noisy margin information derived from preference ratings. Furthermore, many existing methods that use adaptive margins assume access to accurate preference scores, which can be difficult for humans to provide reliably. We propose leveraging preferences over preferences, that is, annotations indicating which of two preferences reflects a stronger distinction, to infer adaptive margins on a per-datapoint basis. Such preference-over-preference annotations are general and can be incorporated into both standard RLHF reward modeling objectives and direct alignment losses. As a concrete instantiation, we introduce DPO-PoP, an extension to Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) that incorporates adaptive margins from preference-over-preference supervision, enabling improved discriminative and generative performance. Additionally, we show a tradeoff between discriminative and generative performance and propose two sampling strategies for gathering preference-over-preference labels to navigate it.

Normative theories allow one to elicit key parts of a ML algorithm from first principles, which is crucial at a time of championed scrutiny for ML work. Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) cleverly bypasses reward modeling by making an explicit link with a specific normative model of human choice. Our paper elevates this connection to the full generality of DPO's normative framework. Getting there requires reworking human choice theory's textbook path for a better RLHF/ML fit. It elevates the connection to a remarkably broad viewpoint on preference optimization, considering the current panorama of DPO follow-ups. It also unveils unexpected riches for ML, chief among which the support for non-convex losses, the fact that any compliant ML analytical choice can be embedded with any human choice model, and a normative framework's umbrella wide enough to safeguard DPO's extensions (margins, length correction, ...). A toy experiment ``far away'' from the DPO crowd is given.

This survey offers a comprehensive foundation on the integration of RL with language models, highlighting prominent algorithms such as Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), Q-Learning, and Actor-Critic methods. Additionally, it provides an extensive technical overview of RL techniques specifically tailored for LLMs, including foundational methods like Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and AI Feedback (RLAIF), as well as advanced strategies such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). We systematically analyze their applications across domains, i.e., from code generation to tool-augmented reasoning. Crucially, we move beyond descriptive categorization to provide a rigorous algorithmic analysis of failure modes, mathematically framing the structural bottlenecks and stability trade-offs inherent in policy optimization. We also present a comparative taxonomy based on reward modeling, feedback mechanisms, and optimization strategies. Our evaluation highlights key trends. RLHF remains dominant for alignment, and outcome-based RL such as Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) significantly improves stepwise reasoning. However, persistent challenges such as reward hacking, computational costs, and scalable feedback collection underscore the need for continued innovation. We also explicate the causal factors behind recent benchmark performances, distinguishing between gains derived from architectural scaling versus those stemming from specific optimization objectives. We further discuss emerging directions, including hybrid RL algorithms, verifier-guided training, and multi-objective alignment frameworks. This survey serves as a roadmap for researchers advancing RL-driven LLM development, balancing capability enhancement with safety and scalability.

Model fusion combines multiple Large Language Models (LLMs) with different strengths into a more powerful, integrated model through lightweight training methods. Existing works on model fusion focus primarily on supervised fine-tuning (SFT), leaving preference alignment (PA) --a critical phase for enhancing LLM performance--largely unexplored. The current few fusion methods on PA phase, like WRPO, simplify the process by utilizing only response outputs from source models while discarding their probability information. To address this limitation, we propose InfiFPO, a preference optimization method for implicit model fusion. InfiFPO replaces the reference model in Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) with a fused source model that synthesizes multi-source probabilities at the sequence level, circumventing complex vocabulary alignment challenges in previous works and meanwhile maintaining the probability information. By introducing probability clipping and max-margin fusion strategies, InfiFPO enables the pivot model to align with human preferences while effectively distilling knowledge from source models. Comprehensive experiments on 11 widely-used benchmarks demonstrate that InfiFPO consistently outperforms existing model fusion and preference optimization methods. When using Phi-4 as the pivot model, InfiFPO improve its average performance from 79.95 to 83.33 on 11 benchmarks, significantly improving its capabilities in mathematics, coding, and reasoning tasks.

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has become a crucial tool to build the latest machine learning systems at scale. The field grew around the core methods of RLHF into today's broader suite of post-training techniques. In this book, we give a comprehensive introduction to the core methods for post-training models for people with some level of quantitative background, organized around the canonical RLHF recipe. The book starts with what RLHF does and why it was created, with seminal technical milestones in its young history and a primer on reinforcement learning context needed to understand the book. The core of the book details every optimization stage in using RLHF, from starting with instruction tuning to training a reward model and finally all of rejection sampling, reinforcement learning, on-policy distillation, and direct alignment algorithms. The book also discusses broader topics, such as the origins of RLHF -- both in recent literature and in a convergence of disparate fields of science in economics, philosophy, and optimal control. The book concludes with advanced topics -- understudied or emerging research questions in synthetic data, tool-use, character training, and evaluation -- and open questions for the field. The book is released with a variety of companion resources, including a codebase, a library to compare model completions from within post-training stages, and an educational course, to be a one-stop shop for learning all foundational concepts for post-training language models.

Curriculum learning enhances Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) for aligning Large Language Models (LLMs), yet existing methods rely on a one-dimensional view of difficulty. In this work, we reframe alignment difficulty as a two-dimensional space spanned by Prompt Complexity (PC) and Pairwise Distinguishability (PD), providing a more principled foundation for alignment. We first demonstrate the efficacy of this space by developing DM-Curri-DPO, a framework of static curricula that already achieves significant gains over baseline methods. Moving beyond these handcrafted paths, we introduce our primary contribution: GSP-Curri-DPO, a novel Group-wise Self-Paced Learning framework. This advanced method empowers the model to navigate the difficulty grid, discovering an optimal learning trajectory based on its own evolving capabilities. Extensive experiments show our self-paced approach not only sets a new state-of-the-art on key benchmarks but, more importantly, demonstrates superior data efficiency and robustness to preference noise. Our work establishes a new paradigm for LLM alignment, offering both a structured difficulty space and an intelligent, model-driven methodology for navigating it.

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has evolved to be one of the main methods for fine-tuning large language models (LLMs). However, existing RLHF methods are non-robust, and their performance deteriorates if the downstream task differs significantly from the preference dataset used in fine-tuning. In order to mitigate this problem, we introduce a distributionally robust RLHF for fine-tuning LLMs. In particular, our goal is to ensure that a fine-tuned model retains its performance even when the distribution of prompts significantly differs from the distribution encountered during fine-tuning. We formulate distributionally robust optimization (DRO) version of two popular fine-tuning methods -- (1) reward-based RLHF and (2) reward-free DPO (direct preference optimization). We propose a minibatch gradient descent based algorithms for both of them, and theoretically prove convergence guarantees for the algorithms. Subsequently, we evaluate our algorithms on an out-of-distribution (OOD) task by first training the model on the Unified-Feedback dataset and evaluating its performance on two different datasets. The experimental results show that our robust training improves the accuracy of the learned reward models on average, and markedly on some tasks, such as reasoning. Furthermore, we show that the robust versions of policy optimization methods, similarly improve performance on OOD tasks.