Distributional Preference Reward Models (DPRM)

• Distributional Preference Reward Models (DPRM) are frameworks that model full reward distributions to capture diverse, uncertain, and multimodal human preferences.
• They leverage techniques like Bayesian inference, quantile regression, and optimal transport to quantify uncertainty and enforce risk-sensitive objectives.
• Empirical results show that DPRM improve policy robustness and alignment accuracy in reinforcement learning and LLM fine-tuning.

Distributional Preference Reward Models (DPRM) constitute a principled and versatile framework for learning and leveraging rich, distributional representations of human or population preferences in reinforcement learning (RL), preference-based optimization, and LLM alignment. These models depart from point-estimate paradigms by representing, propagating, and optimizing distributions over rewards (or preferences), thereby capturing diverse, uncertain, and potentially multimodal human feedback structures.

1. Foundational Principles and Modeling Paradigms

Distributional Preference Reward Models formalize not only the mean but the full distribution of rewards (or preferences) associated with trajectories, responses, or actions conditioned on contextual information. The essential modeling shift is from scalar-valued reward functions $r(s, a)$ (or $r(x,y)$ in LLMs) to probabilistic models $q(r|s,a)$ or to explicit modeling of output distributions $\pi^*$ in LLMs for which human feedback is available only in a relative or comparative form.

The principal motivations and practical implications are:

• Capturing Preference Diversity and Conflict: By maintaining full or multimodal distributions, DPRMs reflect heterogeneity in annotator opinion and label noise, allowing learning algorithms to accommodate or respond to conflicting preferences (Dorka, 16 Sep 2024).
• Uncertainty Quantification: Distributional modeling enables both epistemic (model) and aleatoric (data-driven) uncertainty to be represented and reasoned about, increasing robustness to distributional shifts and noise (Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025).
• Risk Sensitivity and Safety: Distributional outputs make it possible to optimize for risk-averse (e.g., CVaR) or risk-seeking policies by considering the entire reward distribution rather than only the mean (Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025); this is crucial in scenarios involving safety constraints.

Constructs such as quantile models (Dorka, 16 Sep 2024), Bayesian posteriors over rewards (Novoseller et al., 2019), categorical/beta distributions over preference labels (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024), and FSD-based stochastic dominance (Melnyk et al., 9 Jun 2024, Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025) are all central within the DPRM literature.

2. Architectural and Optimization Frameworks

DPRM instantiations differ by application but generally follow a modular architecture:

• Preference Representation Layer: Preferences can be collected and modeled as distributions over categorical labels, quantiles, instance-dependent Gaussian or beta distributions, or conditional vector-valued quantities. Annotation may involve simulation of personas, real human graders, or even synthetic labellers (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024).
• Distributional Modeling/Update: Distributions are estimated and updated using Bayesian mechanisms (e.g., posterior updates with Gaussian or beta priors (Novoseller et al., 2019, Li et al., 15 Feb 2024)), quantile regression (to map features to distributional responses (Dorka, 16 Sep 2024)), or through generative models (e.g., diffusion models, which directly parameterize the distribution over state–action pairs in RL (Pang et al., 3 Mar 2025)).
• Distributional Loss Functions: SDP models admit loss functions that measure divergence in distributional space. Optimal Transport (OT) based formulations (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024, Melnyk et al., 9 Jun 2024, Li et al., 13 Oct 2025) compare predicted and target distributions, accounting for the structure and geometry of preference categories. Convex relaxations of stochastic dominance via OT allow enforcing (or penalizing violations of) FSD constraints across positive vs. negative distributions (Melnyk et al., 9 Jun 2024, Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025).
• Behavioral and Risk-Aware Objectives: Query selection and active preference learning may be guided not by information gain on parameters, but by metrics that only distinguish behaviorally relevant reward functions (behavioral equivalence class approaches (Ellis et al., 9 Mar 2024)), or by risk-sensitive utility functions over the learned reward distributions (e.g., maximizing expected utility under a concave risk function (Dorka, 16 Sep 2024, Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025)).
• Optimization and Policy Fine-tuning: The learned distributional rewards are then used for LLM fine-tuning (typically via PPO or variants thereof (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024)), direct policy optimization, or downstream RL in decision-making settings. Several works introduce novel objective functions for alignment—such as preference maximum likelihood, distillation from explicit reward models, and reverse-KL minimization (Yun et al., 2 Jun 2025).

Modeling Technique	Primary Formulation	Example Reference
Bayesian posterior	$q(r|s,a)$ (Gaussian)	(Novoseller et al., 2019)
Quantile regression	$\{Q(\tau)\}_{\tau}$	(Dorka, 16 Sep 2024)
OT-based loss	$OT(p, t; M)$	(Li et al., 15 Feb 2024, Yun et al., 2 Jun 2025)
Diffusion models	Gen/disc. $D_\phi(s,a)$	(Pang et al., 3 Mar 2025)
FSD constraint	$\int_0^1 [Q_{+}(p)-Q_{-}(p)]_+$	(Melnyk et al., 9 Jun 2024, Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025)

3. Theoretical Guarantees and Generalization

Analytical foundations for DPRMs include:

• Regret Bounds: In preference-based reinforcement learning, explicit bounds are established for regret relative to the optimal policy, e.g., $Regret(T) = O(S\sqrt{2AT\log A})$ for Dueling Posterior Sampling (DPS) (Novoseller et al., 2019).
• Statistical Convergence: Non-asymptotic $O(1/n)$ convergence rates in KL divergence for distribution learning via preference MLE or distillation (Yun et al., 2 Jun 2025).
• Robustness to Distributional Shift: Some architectures, most notably those using ensemble or pessimistic optimization over reward model families, provide enhanced robustness under distribution shift compared to standard implicit reward modeling (Fisch et al., 29 May 2024, Lin et al., 5 Sep 2024).
• Generalization across Domains: Distributional models, particularly those that move beyond scalar or point estimation, show improved generalization in multi-domain settings and in the presence of out-of-distribution (OOD) data shifts (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024, Li et al., 13 Oct 2025).

A critical finding is that point-estimate reward models and implicit reward models (such as those induced in standard DPO) may fit in-distribution data but generalize poorly when evaluation distributions shift, while DPRMs—by maintaining and optimizing over the full distributional signal—demonstrate greater robustness (Lin et al., 5 Sep 2024).

4. Empirical Benchmarks and Practical Impacts

Empirical results across various tasks and domains demonstrate benefits of DPRMs:

• Alignment with Aggregated Preferences: Models that learn or fine-tune against population-level, distributional feedback (rather than a single annotator or a mode) yield more contextually appropriate and unbiased outputs (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024).
• Risk-sensitive Policy Improvement: QRM-based RL policies trained with risk-aware utility functions produce fewer extremely poor outputs, vital for safety-critical applications (Dorka, 16 Sep 2024).
• Robust Offline RL: Diffusion-based preference models for offline RL offer improvements over MLP and Transformer-based alternatives, often outperforming even oracle reward functions in certain settings (Pang et al., 3 Mar 2025).
• Efficient Data Usage in Scaling: Preference data construction strategies that explicitly sample and model the empirical reward distribution (e.g., selecting “chosen” and “rejected” responses at controlled statistical intervals) better utilize large pools of on-policy samples and improve large-model alignment (Xiao et al., 24 Feb 2025).
• Improved Generalization and Sample Efficiency: Use of adaptive margins (estimated via OT over semantically and reward-wise similar samples) further enhances generalization and convergence rates for reward modeling and policy fine-tuning, particularly in OOD settings (Li et al., 13 Oct 2025).

5. Methodological Advances: Optimal Transport, Stochastic Dominance, and Beyond

Optimal Transport (OT) and stochastic dominance emerge as core tools in recent DPRM formulations:

• OT-based Label and Distribution Comparisons: Fine-grained OT loss replaces cross-entropy or MSE, respecting not just whether a sample is correctly classified, but how “far” off-target predictions are within the preference geometry (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024, Li et al., 13 Oct 2025).
• Stochastic Dominance Enforcement: Alignment via Optimal Transport (AOT) and Distributional IRL approaches enforce first-order stochastic dominance—ensuring, for instance, that the reward distribution of “chosen” samples stochastically dominates the “rejected” ones over all quantiles. This is achieved via convex relaxations, with tractable closed-form updates via sorted empirical quantile statistics (Melnyk et al., 9 Jun 2024, Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025).
• Risk Measures in Policy Optimization: Distortion risk measures (DRMs) are introduced as policy objectives, integrating user-specified risk sensitivity directly into the training loop by weighting quantiles of the return distribution (Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025).

6. Generalizations and Applications Across Modalities and Problem Classes

DPRMs extend across a range of settings:

• LLM Alignment: From RLHF and DPO to fully distributional alignment optimized via preference distillation or energy-based models, DPRMs unify approaches under the perspective that LLM alignment should be cast as learning or approximating an explicit aligned distribution $\pi^*$, as opposed to maximizing a scalar reward (Yun et al., 2 Jun 2025, Li et al., 15 Feb 2024).
• Generative Models Beyond LLMs: In domains such as generative music or image models, reward functions can be defined over distributions (e.g., FAD, FID, Vendi score); DRAGON, for example, optimizes distribution-to-distribution metrics to improve aggregate quality and diversity (Bai et al., 21 Apr 2025).
• Multi-objective and Vectorial Preference Bandits: Contextual bandits and RL with vector-reward and cone-based preference ordering generalize scalar regret to Pareto regret, measuring performance as distance between learned and oracle Pareto fronts under distributional shifts (Shukla et al., 21 Aug 2025).
• Imitation and Inverse RL: Distributional IRL introduces joint learning over both reward and return distributions, enabling risk-aware, expressive imitation policy recovery (Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025).

7. Challenges, Open Questions, and Future Directions

DPRMs introduce novel opportunities and present open challenges:

• Scalability and Efficiency: While OT-based and quantile regression approaches scale with the number of labels or quantiles, efficiency with increasing dimension or attribute complexity remains an open area for research, especially in online or real-time alignment (Li et al., 15 Feb 2024).
• Interpretable Risk, Fairness, and Safety: Using the full distribution enables risk-aware and fair optimization, but specifying appropriate utility functions or distortion measures is application-dependent and may require domain-specific design (Wu et al., 3 Oct 2025).
• Preference Data Construction and Usage: The construction and sampling strategy for preference datasets—such as using distributions over rewards rather than extremes or random pairs—has significant influence on alignment quality and generalization (Xiao et al., 24 Feb 2025).
• Hybrid and Robust Model Design: Incorporating ensembles, explicit reward modeling, and pessimistic optimization—such as distilling families of reward models—offers heightened robustness, suggesting a direction towards hybrid explicit-implicit DPRMs (Fisch et al., 29 May 2024, Lin et al., 5 Sep 2024).
• Extending Distributional Approaches: Future work will likely explore extending distributional alignment to richer, higher-order stochastic dominance, efficient soft-sorting or differentiable OT implementations, and integration into self-improving or multi-objective agent frameworks (Melnyk et al., 9 Jun 2024).

---

In summary, Distributional Preference Reward Models unify a spectrum of recent advances for learning from rich, relative, or crowd-sourced feedback. DPRMs embed preference uncertainty, heterogeneity, and distributional structure at the heart of RL and LLM alignment, offering principled tools to improve robustness, safety, and responsiveness to genuine human feedback in highly complex real-world settings.