pith. sign in

arxiv: 2411.04991 · v2 · pith:A23355QAnew · submitted 2024-11-07 · 💻 cs.AI

Rethinking Bradley-Terry Models in Preference-Based Reward Modeling: Foundations, Theory, and Alternatives

classification 💻 cs.AI
keywords rewardmodelmodelingmodelsbradley-terryfoundationsonlypredictions
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

The Bradley-Terry (BT) model is a common and successful practice in reward modeling for Large Language Model (LLM) alignment. However, it remains unclear why this model -- originally developed for multi-player stochastic game matching -- can be adopted to convert pairwise response comparisons to reward values and make predictions. Especially given the fact that only a limited number of prompt-response pairs are sparsely compared with others. In this paper, we first revisit the foundations of using BT models in reward modeling, and establish the convergence rate of BT reward models based on deep neural networks using embeddings, providing a theoretical foundation for their use. Despite theoretically sound, we argue that the BT model is not a necessary choice from the perspective of downstream optimization. This is because a reward model only needs to preserve the correct ranking predictions through a monotonic transformation of the true reward. We highlight the critical concept of order consistency in reward modeling and demonstrate that the BT model possesses this property. Consequently, we propose a simple and straightforward upper-bound algorithm, compatible with off-the-shelf binary classifiers, as an alternative order-consistent reward modeling objective. To offer practical insights, we empirically evaluate the performance of these different reward modeling approaches across more than 12,000 experimental setups, using $6$ base LLMs, $2$ datasets, and diverse annotation designs that vary in quantity, quality, and pairing choices in preference annotations.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Curated Synthetic Data Doesn't Have to Collapse: A Theoretical Study of Generative Retraining with Pluralistic Preferences

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Recursive generative retraining with pluralistic preferences converges to a stable diverse distribution that satisfies a weighted Nash bargaining solution.

  2. Curated Synthetic Data Doesn't Have to Collapse: A Theoretical Study of Generative Retraining with Pluralistic Preferences

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Recursive generative retraining with heterogeneous rewards converges to a stable distribution satisfying a weighted Nash bargaining solution, preserving diversity under stated conditions.

  3. How Humans Help LLMs: Assessing and Incentivizing Human Preference Annotators

    cs.LG 2025-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Develops self-consistency monitoring for preference annotators and derives sample-complexity bounds showing linear contracts achieve near-ideal performance faster than binary ones under continuous actions.

  4. Large Language Models Should Learn Personalized Rather Than Aggregated Human Preferences

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    Position paper advocating personalized preference learning in LLMs over aggregated approaches, grounded in social choice theory and demographic variation.