REVIEW 2 cited by
Inference Time Alignment with Reward-Guided Tree Search
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Inference-time computation methods enhance the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) by leveraging additional computational resources to achieve superior results. Common techniques, such as Best-of-N sampling, Majority Voting, and variants of tree-search algorithms have proven to be effective in boosting the performance of LLMs. These approaches strategically trade increased computational resources for improved model responses. In this work, we proposed DARWIN, an inference-time alignment method that leverages the guidance of a reward model to achieve alignment through a reward-guided tree search. Empirical evidences indicates that our method outperforms other inference-time alignment methods such as Best-of-N and ARGS on two widely accepted alignment benchmarks AlpacaEval 2 and MT-Bench. Furthermore, we show that our inference-time approach achieves performance comparable to preference-tuned models on both benchmarks, highlighting the effectiveness of trading inference-time compute for enhanced performance during inference. We have released our codes at https://github.com/declare-lab/darwin.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Text2midi-InferAlign: Improving Symbolic Music Generation with Inference-Time Alignment
By mutating captions and re-ranking MIDI tokens with CLAP and key-consistency scores, the method improves caption agreement and key matching in text-to-MIDI generation at inference time.
-
A Survey on Training-free Alignment of Large Language Models
A survey that catalogs and categorizes training-free LLM alignment methods into pre-decoding, in-decoding, and post-decoding, with a limited experimental comparison on one model.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.