Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
41 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
41 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
7 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Intuitive Fine-Tuning: Towards Simplifying Alignment into a Single Process (2405.11870v2)

Published 20 May 2024 in cs.CL and cs.AI

Abstract: Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Preference Optimization (PO) are two fundamental processes for enhancing the capabilities of LLMs (LMs) post pre-training, aligning them better with human preferences. Although SFT advances in training efficiency, PO delivers better alignment, thus they are often combined. However, common practices simply apply them sequentially without integrating their optimization objectives, ignoring the opportunities to bridge their paradigm gap and take the strengths from both. To obtain a unified understanding, we interpret SFT and PO with two sub-processes -- Preference Estimation and Transition Optimization -- defined at token level within the Markov Decision Process (MDP) framework. This modeling shows that SFT is only a specialized case of PO with inferior estimation and optimization. PO evaluates the quality of model's entire generated answer, whereas SFT only scores predicted tokens based on preceding tokens from target answers. Therefore, SFT overestimates the ability of model, leading to inferior optimization. Building on this view, we introduce Intuitive Fine-Tuning (IFT) to integrate SFT and Preference Optimization into a single process. IFT captures LMs' intuitive sense of the entire answers through a temporal residual connection, but it solely relies on a single policy and the same volume of non-preference-labeled data as SFT. Our experiments show that IFT performs comparably or even superiorly to sequential recipes of SFT and some typical Preference Optimization methods across several tasks, particularly those requires generation, reasoning, and fact-following abilities. An explainable Frozen Lake game further validates the effectiveness of IFT for getting competitive policy.

Intuitive Fine-Tuning: Towards Unifying SFT and RLHF into a Single Process

The paper at hand proposes an innovative approach to fine-tuning LLMs by unifying Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) under a single process termed as Intuitive Fine-Tuning (IFT). This research, driven by insights into the limitations of current fine-tuning techniques, seeks to optimize LLM alignment with human preferences more efficiently while mitigating computational costs.

Overview and Approach

The authors initially identify a fundamental trade-off when using SFT and RLHF sequentially: while SFT enhances training efficiency, RLHF tends to provide superior alignment with human preferences. Standard practices fail to unify the optimization targets, leading to inefficiencies and compromises in model performance. To overcome this, the paper proposes a new framework that interprets both SFT and RLHF using Preference Estimation and Transition Optimization, defined within a Markov Decision Process (MDP) context. This allows for a more principled integration of RLHF's strengths with the expedience of SFT.

IFT introduces a novel mechanism that leverages a temporal residual connection to capture a model's intuitive assessment of entire answer sequences. Unlike traditional methods that require extensive preference-labeled datasets and complex reward modeling mechanisms, IFT optimizes using a single policy model without the need for auxiliary reference models. The new approach achieves alignment by relying solely on positive samples, similar volumes of data as SFT, thereby enjoying high efficiency.

Empirical Results

The experimentation confirms the efficacy of IFT, demonstrating performance that is comparable or superior to sequential applications of SFT and prominent RLHF alignment methods, notably in tasks requiring generation, reasoning, and fact-following capabilities. The findings hold consistently across several benchmarks, including widely recognized evaluations such as UltraChat and UltraFeedback datasets. The evaluation metrics are further substantiated by testing in the Frozen Lake game scenarios, which serve as simplified, controlled settings to visualize and validate policy improvements.

Practical and Theoretical Implications

Practically, IFT's approach offers a unified alignment procedure that maintains the simplicity and relative low cost of SFT while reaching the alignment quality typical of more resource-intensive RLHF methods. By reducing the reliance on expensive preference labeling and auxiliary data-driven procedures, IFT presents a viable path toward more sustainable and scalable LLM fine-tuning strategies.

Theoretically, this research underscores the importance of viewing SFT and RLHF through a unified lens within an MDP, highlighting opportunities to merge their advantages without incurring substantial downsides. The conceptual framework provided could significantly streamline future advancements in LLM training methodologies, encouraging the formulation of algorithms that inherently integrate diverse learning paradigms.

Future Directions

Future research could extend IFT's framework to explore its scalability across larger models and more diverse linguistic tasks. Observing its performance in real-world applications could offer additional insights into its strengths and limitations. There is also potential in adjusting the parameters of the temporal residual connections to fine-tune the balance between exploration and exploitation more dynamically.

In essence, this paper contributes a novel perspective and methodology for the enhancement of LLMs, providing both a responsible approach to resource utilization and a robust strategy for achieving high-quality human-aligned predictions. This is a noteworthy shift that could potentially shape ongoing efforts and guide future research endeavors in the field of AI-driven language technologies.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (33)
  1. Ralph Allan Bradley and Milton E Terry. 1952. Rank analysis of incomplete block designs: I. the method of paired comparisons. Biometrika, 39(3/4):324–345.
  2. Human alignment of large language models through online preference optimisation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.08635.
  3. Self-play fine-tuning converts weak language models to strong language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.01335.
  4. Scaling instruction-finetuned language models. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 25(70):1–53.
  5. Think you have solved question answering? try arc, the ai2 reasoning challenge. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.05457.
  6. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168.
  7. Ultrafeedback: Boosting language models with high-quality feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01377.
  8. Enhancing chat language models by scaling high-quality instructional conversations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14233.
  9. Alpacafarm: A simulation framework for methods that learn from human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36.
  10. Kto: Model alignment as prospect theoretic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01306.
  11. Farama. 2023. Frozen lake. https://gymnasium.farama.org/environments/toy_text/frozen_lake/. Accessed: 2024-05-19.
  12. Direct and indirect reinforcement learning. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 36(8):4439–4467.
  13. Direct language model alignment from online ai feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04792.
  14. Reference-free monolithic preference optimization with odds ratio. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07691.
  15. Mistral 7b. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.06825.
  16. Reinforcement learning in continuous action spaces through sequential monte carlo methods. Advances in neural information processing systems, 20.
  17. Rlaif: Scaling reinforcement learning from human feedback with ai feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.00267.
  18. Learning hand-eye coordination for robotic grasping with deep learning and large-scale data collection. The International journal of robotics research, 37(4-5):421–436.
  19. Truthfulqa: Measuring how models mimic human falsehoods. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.07958.
  20. Statistical rejection sampling improves preference optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.06657.
  21. Extensive self-contrast enables feedback-free language model alignment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.00604.
  22. Orca-math: Unlocking the potential of slms in grade school math. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14830.
  23. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in neural information processing systems, 35:27730–27744.
  24. Direct preference optimization: Your language model is secretly a reward model. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36.
  25. Winogrande: An adversarial winograd schema challenge at scale. Communications of the ACM, 64(9):99–106.
  26. Proximal policy optimization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347.
  27. Harm Seijen and Rich Sutton. 2014. True online td (lambda). In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 692–700. PMLR.
  28. Richard S Sutton. 1988. Learning to predict by the methods of temporal differences. Machine learning, 3:9–44.
  29. Zephyr: Direct distillation of lm alignment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.16944.
  30. Grandmaster level in starcraft ii using multi-agent reinforcement learning. Nature, 575(7782):350–354.
  31. Neural text generation with unlikelihood training. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.04319.
  32. Self-rewarding language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.10020.
  33. Fine-tuning language models from human preferences. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.08593.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (8)
  1. Ermo Hua (16 papers)
  2. Biqing Qi (37 papers)
  3. Kaiyan Zhang (33 papers)
  4. Yue Yu (343 papers)
  5. Ning Ding (122 papers)
  6. Xingtai Lv (13 papers)
  7. Kai Tian (21 papers)
  8. Bowen Zhou (141 papers)
Citations (2)
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com