发现在线数据未必最优,提出分阶段优化新策略。
Is On-Policy Data always the Best Choice for Direct Preference Optimization-based LM Alignment?
- 将对齐过程分为注入与微调两阶段,分别适配多样与高质量数据。
- 实测在线数据使Llama-3效果提升3倍,但Zephyr反而下降至0.4倍。
- 提出边界识别算法,适用于多种模型与对齐方法,具普适性。
语言模型与人类偏好的对齐对构建可靠AI系统至关重要。传统方法通过优化模型策略以最大化反映人类偏好的期望奖励。近期提出的直接偏好优化(DPO)方法从静态偏好数据中直接优化策略,并通过引入在线采样(即训练过程中生成的候选偏好)进一步提升对齐效果。然而,我们发现在线数据并非总是最优:在不同模型上表现出显著差异——例如,在Llama-3上在线数据可带来3倍的效果提升,而在Zephyr上却降至0.4倍。为此,我们提出对齐阶段假设,将对齐过程划分为偏好注入阶段(需多样化数据)与偏好微调阶段(偏好高质量数据)。通过理论与实证分析,我们刻画了这两个阶段特性,并提出一种有效算法来识别其边界。我们在5个模型(Llama、Zephyr、Phi-2、Qwen、Pythia)和2种对齐方法(DPO、SLiC-HF)上验证了该假设的普适性及边界测量算法的有效性。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
The alignment of language models~(LMs) with human preferences is critical for building reliable AI systems. The problem is typically framed as optimizing an LM policy to maximize the expected reward that reflects human preferences. Recently, Direct Preference Optimization~(DPO) was proposed as a LM alignment method that directly optimize the policy from static preference data, and further improved by incorporating on-policy sampling~(i.e., preference candidates generated during the training loop) for better LM alignment. However, we show on-policy data is not always optimal, with systematic effectiveness difference emerging between static and on-policy preference candidates. For example, on-policy data can result in a $3\times$ effectiveness compared with static data for Llama-3, and a $0.4\times$ effectiveness for Zephyr. To explain the phenomenon, we propose the alignment stage assumption, which divides the alignment process into two distinct stages: the preference injection stage, which benefits from diverse data, and the preference fine-tuning stage, which favors high-quality data. Through theoretical and empirical analysis, we characterize these stages and propose an effective algorithm to identify the boundaries between them. We perform experiments on $5$ models~(Llama, Zephyr, Phi-2, Qwen, Pythia) and $2$ alignment methods~(DPO, SLiC-HF) to show the generalizability of alignment stage assumption and the effectiveness of the boundary measurement algorithm.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。