arXiv:2607.22766cs.LGcs.AI2026-07

用影响评估法自动发现大模型对齐数据中的错误标签,提升数据质量。

Beyond Shapley: An Influence-Based Data Auditing Pipeline for LLM Alignment and Evaluation

  • 基于零样本概率变化计算数据记录的预测影响,无需重训练模型。
  • 在两个对齐数据集上减少99.1%的人工审计工作量,发现大量标注错误。
  • 适合关注模型对齐数据可信度的研究者与评测系统设计者。

大型语言模型(LLMs)的对齐日益受制于数据质量。随着数据集规模扩大,偏好和指令微调语料库不可避免地积累隐藏的结构矛盾、安全风险及系统性人工标注错误。传统数据审计方法如语义去重或大模型作为裁判者,难以捕捉单条记录的实际预测影响,常遗漏深层功能规则冲突。为此,我们提出一种可扩展的、仅需推理的数据价值评估流程,无需迭代模型重训练即可近似计算Shapley值。通过将语义k-NN邻域映射为有向图,该框架利用参考LLM的概率分布,通过零样本与单样本条件对数似然变化评估数据效用。进而将这些预测影响得分转化为局部优势指标,以识别梯度冲突记录。我们在两个经过严格审核的对齐数据集上验证了该流程的有效性:在HelpSteer2数据集上,应用本方法使人工审计搜索空间缩小99.1%,成功发现多种故障模式下的误标记录;在Anthropic的HH-RLHF训练与评估数据集上,自动化审计策略识别出数千个隐含的安全性与事实偏好反转问题。关键的是,将审计扩展至评估集后,暴露出现有基准测试的严重漏洞:高度能力模型常预测更安全或更有帮助的回答,却因客观错误的人类真实标签被惩罚。总体而言,本工作提供了一种数学严谨、高效诊断工具,用于揭示人工标签缺陷、净化评估基准并保障大模型对齐数据的完整性。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

The alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs) is increasingly bottlenecked by data quality. As datasets scale, massive preference and instruction-tuning corpora inevitably accumulate hidden structural contradictions, safety risks, and systemic human annotation errors. Standard dataset auditing methods, such as semantic deduplication or LLM-as-a-judge, struggle to capture the actual predictive impact of individual records and often miss deep functional rule clashes. To address this, we introduce a scalable, inference-only data valuation pipeline that approximates the Shapley value without iterative model retraining. By mapping semantic k-NN neighborhoods into a directed graph, our framework evaluates data utility directly through a reference LLM's probability distribution using zero-shot and one-shot conditional log-likelihood shifts. Our pipeline then translates these predictive influence scores into localized advantage metrics to isolate gradient-conflicting records. We demonstrate the pipeline's efficacy in sanitizing two heavily vetted alignment datasets. First, applying our pipeline to the HelpSteer2 dataset reduced the manual audit search space by 99.1%, successfully uncovering falsely-labeled records across diverse failure modes. Second, applying our automated audit strategy to Anthropic's HH-RLHF training and evaluation splits identified thousands of hidden safety and factual preference inversions. Crucially, by extending this audit to the evaluation split, we expose severe vulnerabilities in current benchmark integrity: highly capable models frequently predict the safer or more helpful response, only to be penalized by objectively flawed human ground-truth labels. Overall, our work provides a mathematically grounded, highly efficient diagnostic tool to uncover human label failures, sanitize evaluation benchmarks, and ensure the integrity of LLM alignment data.

模型对齐数据审计标注错误评估基准

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。