Pith. sign in

REVIEW 11 cited by

Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization in Direct Alignment Algorithms

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.02900 v2 pith:DJRWIYNU submitted 2024-06-05 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL

Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization in Direct Alignment Algorithms

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL
keywords rewardmodelrlhfalgorithmsdaasdirecthackingover-optimization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has been crucial to the recent success of Large Language Models (LLMs), however, it is often a complex and brittle process. In the classical RLHF framework, a reward model is first trained to represent human preferences, which is in turn used by an online reinforcement learning (RL) algorithm to optimize the LLM. A prominent issue with such methods is reward over-optimization or reward hacking, where performance as measured by the learned proxy reward model increases, but true quality plateaus or even deteriorates. Direct Alignment Algorithms (DDAs) like Direct Preference Optimization have emerged as alternatives to the classical RLHF pipeline by circumventing the reward modeling phase. However, although DAAs do not use a separate proxy reward model, they still commonly deteriorate from over-optimization. While the so-called reward hacking phenomenon is not well-defined for DAAs, we still uncover similar trends: at higher KL budgets, DAA algorithms exhibit similar degradation patterns to their classic RLHF counterparts. In particular, we find that DAA methods deteriorate not only across a wide range of KL budgets but also often before even a single epoch of the dataset is completed. Through extensive empirical experimentation, this work formulates and formalizes the reward over-optimization or hacking problem for DAAs and explores its consequences across objectives, training regimes, and model scales.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 11 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. More Convincing, Not More Correct: Self-Play Reward Hacking of Reference-Free LLM Judges

    cs.LG 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0

    Self-play against reference-free LLM judges drives judge pass rates to 0.94 while true accuracy stays at 0.20, a reward-hacking basin that transfers across judge families and is prevented only by requiring the judge t...

  2. TokenRatio: Principled Token-Level Preference Optimization via Ratio Matching

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Introduces TBPO, which derives a Bregman-divergence density-ratio matching objective for token-level preference optimization that generalizes DPO while preserving the induced optimal policy.

  3. TokenRatio: Principled Token-Level Preference Optimization via Ratio Matching

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    TBPO posits a token-level Bradley-Terry model and derives a Bregman-divergence density-ratio matching loss that generalizes DPO while preserving token-level optimality.

  4. Likelihood scoring for continuations of mathematical text: a self-supervised benchmark with tests for shortcut vulnerabilities

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Presents a likelihood-based benchmark for equation-suffix prediction in technical papers with controls to detect shortcut vulnerabilities in model forecasts.

  5. $f$-Divergence Regularized RLHF: Two Tales of Sampling and Unified Analyses

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The paper establishes the first O(log T) regret and O(1/T) sub-optimality bounds for online RLHF under general f-divergence regularization via two sampling algorithms.

  6. Monitoring Reasoning Models for Misbehavior and the Risks of Promoting Obfuscation

    cs.AI 2025-03 conditional novelty 7.0

    Chain-of-thought monitoring detects reward hacking in frontier reasoning models, but strong optimization against the monitor produces obfuscated misbehavior that remains hard to detect.

  7. TokenRatio: Principled Token-Level Preference Optimization via Ratio Matching

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    TBPO derives a token-level preference optimization objective from sequence-level pairwise data via Bregman divergence ratio matching that generalizes DPO and improves alignment quality.

  8. Likelihood scoring for continuations of mathematical text: a self-supervised benchmark with tests for shortcut vulnerabilities

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A new benchmark uses separate predictor and scorer LLMs to test whether forecast strings improve likelihood of hidden mathematical equation continuations, with controls that detect priming shortcuts.

  9. The Differences Between Direct Alignment Algorithms are a Blur

    cs.LG 2025-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A controlled unification of direct alignment algorithms shows the ranking objective (pairwise vs pointwise) drives alignment quality more than the scalar score optimized.

  10. Efficient Multi-Agent System Training with Data Influence-Oriented Tree Search

    cs.CL 2025-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DITS replaces Q-value guidance in MCTS with influence scores for synthetic data synthesis in multi-agent LLM training, claiming better efficiency and performance on eight datasets.

  11. Failure Modes of Maximum Entropy RLHF

    cs.LG 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Derives SimPO from MaxEnt RL and reports that MaxEnt RL in online RLHF exhibits frequent overoptimization and unstable KL dynamics across scales, unlike stable KL-constrained baselines.