In the quest to advance human-centric natural language generation (NLG) systems, ensuring alignment between NLG models and human preferences is crucial. For this alignment, current popular methods leverage a reinforcement learning (RL) approach with a reward model trained on feedback from humans. However, inherent disagreements due to the subjective nature of human preferences pose a significant challenge for training the reward model, resulting in a deterioration of the NLG performance. To tackle this issue, previous approaches typically rely on majority voting or averaging to consolidate multiple inconsistent preferences into a merged one. Although straightforward to understand and execute, such methods suffer from an inability to capture the nuanced degrees of disaggregation among humans and may only represent a specialized subset of individuals, thereby lacking the ability to quantitatively disclose the universality of human preferences. To address this challenge, this paper proposes a novel approach, which employs a Bayesian framework to account for the distribution of disagreements among human preferences as training a preference model, and names it as $\textbf{d-PM}$. Besides, considering the RL strategy's inefficient and complex training process over the training efficiency, we further propose utilizing the contrastive learning strategy to train the NLG model with the preference scores derived from the d-PM model. Extensive experiments on two human-centric NLG tasks, i.e., emotional support conversation and integrity ``Rule-of-Thumb'' generation, show that our method consistently exceeds previous SOTA models in both automatic and human evaluations.

Most financial recommendation systems often fail to account for key behavioral and regulatory factors, leading to advice that is misaligned with user preferences, difficult to interpret, or unlikely to be followed. We present FLARKO (Financial Language-model for Asset Recommendation with Knowledge-graph Optimization), a novel framework that integrates Large Language Models (LLMs), Knowledge Graphs (KGs), and Kahneman-Tversky Optimization (KTO) to generate asset recommendations that are both profitable and behaviorally aligned. FLARKO encodes users' transaction histories and asset trends as structured KGs, providing interpretable and controllable context for the LLM. To demonstrate the adaptability of our approach, we develop and evaluate both a centralized architecture (CenFLARKO) and a federated variant (FedFLARKO). To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of combining KTO for fine-tuning of LLMs for financial asset recommendation. We also present the first use of structured KGs to ground LLM reasoning over behavioral financial data in a federated learning (FL) setting. Evaluated on the FAR-Trans dataset, FLARKO consistently outperforms state-of-the-art recommendation baselines on behavioral alignment and joint profitability, while remaining interpretable and resource-efficient.

In the quest to advance human-centric natural language generation (NLG) systems, ensuring alignment between NLG models and human preferences is crucial. For this alignment, current popular methods leverage a reinforcement learning (RL) approach with a reward model trained on feedback from humans. However, inherent disagreements due to the subjective nature of human preferences pose a significant challenge for training the reward model, resulting in a deterioration of the NLG performance. To tackle this issue, previous approaches typically rely on majority voting or averaging to consolidate multiple inconsistent preferences into a merged one. Although straightforward to understand and execute, such methods suffer from an inability to capture the nuanced degrees of disaggregation among humans and may only represent a specialized subset of individuals, thereby lacking the ability to quantitatively disclose the universality of human preferences.

Diagnostic imaging studies are an increasingly important component of the workup and management of acutely presenting patients. However, ordering appropriate imaging studies according to evidence-based medical guidelines is a challenging task with a high degree of variability between healthcare providers. To address this issue, recent work has investigated if generative AI and large language models can be leveraged to help clinicians order relevant imaging studies for patients. However, it is challenging to ensure that these tools are correctly aligned with medical guidelines, such as the American College of Radiology's Appropriateness Criteria (ACR AC). In this study, we introduce a framework to intelligently leverage language models by recommending imaging studies for patient cases that are aligned with evidence-based guidelines. We make available a novel dataset of patient "one-liner" scenarios to power our experiments, and optimize state-of-the-art language models to achieve an accuracy on par with clinicians in image ordering. Finally, we demonstrate that our language model-based pipeline can be used as intelligent assistants by clinicians to support image ordering workflows and improve the accuracy of imaging study ordering according to the ACR AC. Our work demonstrates and validates a strategy to leverage AI-based software to improve trustworthy clinical decision making in alignment with expert evidence-based guidelines.

Learning from preference-based feedback has recently gained traction as a promising approach to align language models with human interests. While these aligned generative models have demonstrated impressive capabilities across various tasks, their dependence on high-quality human preference data poses a bottleneck in practical applications. Specifically, noisy (incorrect and ambiguous) preference pairs in the dataset might restrict the language models from capturing human intent accurately. While practitioners have recently proposed heuristics to mitigate the effect of noisy preferences, a complete theoretical understanding of their workings remain elusive. In this work, we aim to bridge this gap by by introducing a general framework for policy optimization in the presence of random preference flips. We focus on the direct preference optimization (DPO) algorithm in particular since it assumes that preferences adhere to the Bradley-Terry-Luce (BTL) model, raising concerns about the impact of noisy data on the learned policy. We design a novel loss function, which de-bias the effect of noise on average, making a policy trained by minimizing that loss robust to the noise. Under log-linear parameterization of the policy class and assuming good feature coverage of the SFT policy, we prove that the sub-optimality gap of the proposed robust DPO (rDPO) policy compared to the optimal policy is of the order $O(\frac{1}{1-2\epsilon}\sqrt{\frac{d}{n}})$, where $\epsilon < 1/2$ is flip rate of labels, $d$ is policy parameter dimension and $n$ is size of dataset. Our experiments on IMDb sentiment generation and Anthropic's helpful-harmless dataset show that rDPO is robust to noise in preference labels compared to vanilla DPO and other heuristics proposed by practitioners.

Positioned between pre-training and user deployment, aligning large language models (LLMs) through reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a prevailing strategy for training instruction following-models such as ChatGPT. In this work, we initiate the study of privacy-preserving alignment of LLMs through Differential Privacy (DP) in conjunction with RL. Following the influential work of Ziegler et al. (2020), we study two dominant paradigms: (i) alignment via RL without human in the loop (e.g., positive review generation) and (ii) alignment via RL from human feedback (RLHF) (e.g., summarization in a human-preferred way). We give a new DP framework to achieve alignment via RL, and prove its correctness. Our experimental results validate the effectiveness of our approach, offering competitive utility while ensuring strong privacy protections.

Aligning language models with preferences can be posed as approximating a target distribution representing some desired behavior. Existing approaches differ both in the functional form of the target distribution and the algorithm used to approximate it. For instance, Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) corresponds to minimizing a reverse KL from an implicit target distribution arising from a KL penalty in the objective. On the other hand, Generative Distributional Control (GDC) has an explicit target distribution and minimizes a forward KL from it using the Distributional Policy Gradient (DPG) algorithm. In this paper, we propose a new approach, f-DPG, which allows the use of any f-divergence to approximate any target distribution that can be evaluated. f-DPG unifies both frameworks (RLHF, GDC) and the approximation methods (DPG, RL with KL penalties). We show the practical benefits of various choices of divergence objectives and demonstrate that there is no universally optimal objective but that different divergences present different alignment and diversity trade-offs. We show that Jensen-Shannon divergence strikes a good balance between these objectives, and frequently outperforms forward KL divergence by a wide margin, leading to significant improvements over prior work. These distinguishing characteristics between divergences persist as the model size increases, highlighting the importance of selecting appropriate divergence objectives.

An important aspect of developing LLMs that interact with humans is to align models' behavior to their users. It is possible to prompt an LLM into behaving as a certain persona, especially a user group or ideological persona the model captured during its pertaining stage. But, how to best align an LLM with a specific user and not a demographic or ideological group remains an open question. Mining public opinion surveys (by Pew Research), we find that the opinions of a user and their demographics and ideologies are not mutual predictors. We use this insight to align LLMs by modeling both user opinions as well as user demographics and ideology, achieving up to 7 points accuracy gains in predicting public opinions from survey questions across a broad set of topics. In addition to the typical approach of prompting LLMs with demographics and ideology, we discover that utilizing the most relevant past opinions from individual users enables the model to predict user opinions more accurately.