Aspect sentiment quad prediction (ASQP) is inherently challenging to predict a structured quadruple with four core sentiment elements, including aspect term (a), aspect category (c), opinion term (o), and sentiment polarity (s). Prior methods relying on marker-based prediction struggle with modeling the intricate relationships among elements and experience sharp performance declines when predicting higher-order elements (e.g., c and s) under standard supervised fine-tuning. To address these limitations, we employ reasoning-based generation to output both the quadruple and a natural language rationale under element prefixes within a unified template, encouraging explicit relational reasoning and interpretability. To further enhance element-wise alignment, we introduce a listwise preference optimization framework for improving structural validity and relational coherence. Specifically, we generate element-wise confusable candidates via syntactic and semantic proximity, then train the model with listwise objectives to prefer the gold candidates over closely competing alternatives. Extensive experiments on four benchmark datasets demonstrate that our framework effectively improves quadruple prediction accuracy and explanation consistency.

Aligning language models (LMs) with curated human feedback is critical to control their behaviors in real-world applications. Several recent policy optimization methods, such as DPO and SLiC, serve as promising alternatives to the traditional Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) approach. In practice, human feedback often comes in a format of a ranked list over multiple responses to amortize the cost of reading prompt. Multiple responses can also be ranked by reward models or AI feedback. There lacks such a study on directly fitting upon a list of responses. In this work, we formulate the LM alignment as a listwise ranking problem and describe the Listwise Preference Optimization (LiPO) framework, where the policy can potentially learn more effectively from a ranked list of plausible responses given the prompt. This view draws an explicit connection to Learning-to-Rank (LTR), where most existing preference optimization work can be mapped to existing ranking objectives, especially pairwise ones. Following this connection, we provide an examination of ranking objectives that are not well studied for LM alignment withDPO and SLiC as special cases when list size is two. In particular, we highlight a specific method, LiPO-{\lambda}, which leverages a state-of-the-art listwise ranking objective and weights each preference pair in a more advanced manner. We show that LiPO-{\lambda} can outperform DPO and SLiC by a clear margin on two preference alignment tasks.