Reward functions are difficult to design and often hard to align with human intent.

Reward functions are difficult to design and often hard to align with human intent. Preference-based Reinforcement Learning (RL) algorithms address these problems by learning reward functions from human feedback. However, the majority of preference-based RL methods na\ively combine supervised reward models with off-the-shelf RL algorithms. Contemporary approaches have sought to improve performance and query complexity by using larger and more complex reward architectures such as transformers. Instead of using highly complex architectures, we develop a new and parameter-efficient algorithm, Inverse Preference Learning (IPL), specifically designed for learning from offline preference data.

Reward functions are difficult to design and often hard to align with human intent.

Setting up a well-designed reward function has been challenging for many reinforcement learning applications.

Offline algorithms for Reinforcement Learning from Human Preferences (RLHF), which use only a fixed dataset of sampled responses given an input, and preference feedback among these responses, have gained increasing prominence in the literature on aligning language models. In this paper, we study how the different design choices made in methods such as DPO, IPO, SLiC and many variants influence the quality of the learned policy, from a theoretical perspective. Our treatment yields insights into the choices of loss function, the policy which is used to normalize log-likelihoods, and also the role of the data sampling policy. Notably, our results do not rely on the standard reparameterization-style arguments used to motivate some of the algorithms in this family, which allows us to give a unified treatment to a broad class of methods. We also conduct a small empirical study to verify some of the theoretical findings on a standard summarization benchmark.

Preference-based reinforcement learning (RL) offers a promising approach for aligning policies with human intent but is often constrained by the high cost of human feedback. In this work, we introduce PrefVLM, a framework that integrates Vision-Language Models (VLMs) with selective human feedback to significantly reduce annotation requirements while maintaining performance. Our method leverages VLMs to generate initial preference labels, which are then filtered to identify uncertain cases for targeted human annotation. Additionally, we adapt VLMs using a self-supervised inverse dynamics loss to improve alignment with evolving policies. Experiments on Meta-World manipulation tasks demonstrate that PrefVLM achieves comparable or superior success rates to state-of-the-art methods while using up to 2 x fewer human annotations. Furthermore, we show that adapted VLMs enable efficient knowledge transfer across tasks, further minimizing feedback needs. Our results highlight the potential of combining VLMs with selective human supervision to make preference-based RL more scalable and practical.

Reward functions are difficult to design and often hard to align with human intent. Preference-based Reinforcement Learning (RL) algorithms address these problems by learning reward functions from human feedback. However, the majority of preference-based RL methods na\"ively combine supervised reward models with off-the-shelf RL algorithms. Contemporary approaches have sought to improve performance and query complexity by using larger and more complex reward architectures such as transformers. Instead of using highly complex architectures, we develop a new and parameter-efficient algorithm, Inverse Preference Learning (IPL), specifically designed for learning from offline preference data.

Overall I find this paper is generally interesting, clearly presented, and technically sound. My concerns are that the contributions of this paper seems rather incremental when compared to previous work. Also, some of the experiments would benefit from further analysis. Let me elaborate below: Summary: This paper advocates a preference-based approach for teaching an RL agent to perform a task. A human observes two trajectories generated by different policies and indicates which one is better performing the desired task.

Human-in-the-loop reinforcement learning (HRL) allows the training of agents through various interfaces, even for non-expert humans. Recently, preference-based methods (PBRL), where the human has to give his preference over two trajectories, increased in popularity since they allow training in domains where more direct feedback is hard to formulate. However, the current PBRL methods have limitations and do not provide humans with an expressive interface for giving feedback. With this work, we propose a new preference-based learning method that provides humans with a more expressive interface to provide their preference over trajectories and a factual explanation (or annotation of why they have this preference). These explanations allow the human to explain what parts of the trajectory are most relevant for the preference. We allow the expression of the explanations over individual trajectory steps. We evaluate our method in various simulations using a simulated human oracle (with realistic restrictions), and our results show that our extended feedback can improve the speed of learning. Code & data: github.com/under-rewiev