Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Hybrid Alignment Training for Large Language Models

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 2406.15178 v1 pith:M7PG2TQV submitted 2024-06-21 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords alignmenttraininghbatobjectivesllmsdifferenthumanhybrid
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Alignment training is crucial for enabling large language models (LLMs) to cater to human intentions and preferences. It is typically performed based on two stages with different objectives: instruction-following alignment and human-preference alignment. However, aligning LLMs with these objectives in sequence suffers from an inherent problem: the objectives may conflict, and the LLMs cannot guarantee to simultaneously align with the instructions and human preferences well. To response to these, in this work, we propose a Hybrid Alignment Training (Hbat) approach, based on alternating alignment and modified elastic weight consolidation methods. The basic idea is to alternate between different objectives during alignment training, so that better collaboration can be achieved between the two alignment tasks.We experiment with Hbat on summarization and dialogue tasks. Experimental results show that the proposed \textsc{Hbat} can significantly outperform all baselines. Notably, Hbat yields consistent performance gains over the traditional two-stage alignment training when using both proximal policy optimization and direct preference optimization.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. HEAL: A Hypothesis-Based Preference-Aware Analysis Framework

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    HEAL evaluates preference optimization by measuring ranking accuracy and strength correlation between model likelihoods and proxy reward scores over multi-response hypothesis spaces.

Pith tools