Anchored Preference Optimization and Contrastive Revisions: Addressing Underspecification in Alignment
<|reference_start|>Anchored Preference Optimization and Contrastive Revisions: Addressing Underspecification in Alignment: Large Language Models (LLMs) are often aligned using contrastive alignment objectives and preference pair datasets. The interaction between model, paired data, and objective makes alignment a complicated procedure, sometimes producing subpar results. We study this and find that (i) preference data gives a better learning signal when the underlying responses are contrastive, and (ii) alignment objectives lead to better performance when they specify more control over the model during training. Based on these insights, we introduce Contrastive Learning from AI Revisions (CLAIR), a data-creation method which leads to more contrastive preference pairs, and Anchored Preference Optimization (APO), a controllable and more stable alignment objective. We align Llama-3-8B-Instruct using various comparable datasets and alignment objectives and measure MixEval-Hard scores, which correlate highly with human judgments. The CLAIR preferences lead to the strongest performance out of all datasets, and APO consistently outperforms less controllable objectives. Our best model, trained on 32K CLAIR preferences with APO, improves Llama-3-8B-Instruct by 7.65%, closing the gap with GPT4-turbo by 45%. Our code is available at https://github.com/ContextualAI/CLAIR_and_APO.<|reference_end|>
@article{d'oosterlinck2024anchored,
    title={Anchored Preference Optimization and Contrastive Revisions: Addressing
  Underspecification in Alignment},
    author={Karel D'Oosterlinck, Winnie Xu, Chris Develder, Thomas Demeester,
  Amanpreet Singh, Christopher Potts, Douwe Kiela, and Shikib Mehri},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06266},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2408.06266},
    primaryClass={cs.LG cs.AI cs.CL}
}