Close Menu
    DevStackTipsDevStackTips
    • Home
    • News & Updates
      1. Tech & Work
      2. View All

      The Case For Minimal WordPress Setups: A Contrarian View On Theme Frameworks

      June 4, 2025

      How To Fix Largest Contentful Paint Issues With Subpart Analysis

      June 4, 2025

      How To Prevent WordPress SQL Injection Attacks

      June 4, 2025

      Smashing Animations Part 4: Optimising SVGs

      June 4, 2025

      I test AI tools for a living. Here are 3 image generators I actually use and how

      June 4, 2025

      The world’s smallest 65W USB-C charger is my latest travel essential

      June 4, 2025

      This Spotlight alternative for Mac is my secret weapon for AI-powered search

      June 4, 2025

      Tech prophet Mary Meeker just dropped a massive report on AI trends – here’s your TL;DR

      June 4, 2025
    • Development
      1. Algorithms & Data Structures
      2. Artificial Intelligence
      3. Back-End Development
      4. Databases
      5. Front-End Development
      6. Libraries & Frameworks
      7. Machine Learning
      8. Security
      9. Software Engineering
      10. Tools & IDEs
      11. Web Design
      12. Web Development
      13. Web Security
      14. Programming Languages
        • PHP
        • JavaScript
      Featured

      Beyond AEM: How Adobe Sensei Powers the Full Enterprise Experience

      June 4, 2025
      Recent

      Beyond AEM: How Adobe Sensei Powers the Full Enterprise Experience

      June 4, 2025

      Simplify Negative Relation Queries with Laravel’s whereDoesntHaveRelation Methods

      June 4, 2025

      Cast Model Properties to a Uri Instance in 12.17

      June 4, 2025
    • Operating Systems
      1. Windows
      2. Linux
      3. macOS
      Featured

      My Favorite Obsidian Plugins and Their Hidden Settings

      June 4, 2025
      Recent

      My Favorite Obsidian Plugins and Their Hidden Settings

      June 4, 2025

      Rilasciata /e/OS 3.0: Nuova Vita per Android Senza Google, Più Privacy e Controllo per l’Utente

      June 4, 2025

      Rilasciata Oracle Linux 9.6: Scopri le Novità e i Miglioramenti nella Sicurezza e nelle Prestazioni

      June 4, 2025
    • Learning Resources
      • Books
      • Cheatsheets
      • Tutorials & Guides
    Home»Development»Machine Learning»Unraveling Direct Alignment Algorithms: A Comparative Study on Optimization Strategies for LLM Alignment

    Unraveling Direct Alignment Algorithms: A Comparative Study on Optimization Strategies for LLM Alignment

    February 8, 2025

    Aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values remains difficult due to unclear goals, weak training signals, and the complexity of human intent. Direct Alignment Algorithms (DAAs) offer a way to simplify this process by optimizing models directly without relying on reward modeling or reinforcement learning. These algorithms use different ranking methods, such as comparing pairs of outputs or scoring individual responses. Some versions also require an extra fine-tuning step, while others do not. There are further complications in understanding how effective they are and which approach is best because of differences in how rewards are defined and applied.

    Currently, methods for aligning large language models (LLMs) follow multiple steps, including supervised fine-tuning (SFT), reward modeling, and reinforcement learning. These methods introduce challenges due to their complexity, dependence on reward models, and high computational cost. DAAs try to optimize models from human preferences directly, bypassing reinforcement learning and reward modeling. Different forms of DAAs may vary in their optimization method, loss functions, and fine-tuning method. Despite their potential to simplify alignment, inconsistencies in ranking methods, reward calculations, and training strategies create further difficulties in evaluating their effectiveness.

    To improve single-stage direct alignment algorithms (DAAs) like ORPO and ASFT, researchers proposed adding a separate supervised fine-tuning (SFT) phase and introducing a scaling parameter (β). These methods were originally not provided with a β parameter and did alignment directly. As such, they were less effective. Including an explicit SFT phase and letting β control preference scaling gives these methods performance comparable to two-stage approaches such as DPO. The main distinction between different DAAs lies in whether they use an odds ratio or a reference policy ratio, which affects how alignment is optimized.

    The framework modifies the loss functions of ASFT and ORPO to include SFT in an implicit way, making them adaptable to single-stage and two-stage configurations. The scaling parameter β is used to adjust the strength of preference updates toward better control in optimization. Experimental analysis suggests that DAAs relying on pairwise comparisons outperform those relying on pointwise preferences, thus warranting structured ranking signals in alignment quality.

    Researchers evaluated Direct Alignment Algorithms (DAA) using Llama 3.1 8B on UltraChat and UF datasets, testing on AlpacaEval 2 and ArenaHard, while Llama 3.2 3B was used for Reddit TL; DR. Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on UF improved ORPO and ASFT alignment. ORPO performed on par with DPO and ASFT, achieving a +2.04% increase in ArenaHard win rate but still lagging behind ORPO. β tuning significantly enhanced performance, yielding improvements of +7.0 and +43.4 in GPT-4 win rate for TL;DR and +3.46 and +8.27 in UF AlpacaEval 2 LC win rate. Comparative analysis of DPO, IPO, SimPO, and other alignment methods showed that β adjustments in LβASFTAlign and LβORPOAlign improved preference optimization, demonstrating that SFT-trained models performed best when incorporating LAlign components.

    In the end, the proposed method improved Direct Alignment Algorithms (DAAs) by incorporating a supervised fine-tuning (SFT) phase. This led to consistent performance gains and significantly enhanced ORPO and ASFT. Even though the evaluation was conducted on specific datasets and model sizes, the findings provide a structured approach for improving model alignment. This method is a foundation to be used as a basis for future research. It can be extrapolated to other larger models with more diverse data sets to refine alignment techniques through optimization strategies that identify factors in alignment quality.


    Check out the Paper. All credit for this research goes to the researchers of this project. Also, don’t forget to follow us on Twitter and join our Telegram Channel and LinkedIn Group. Don’t Forget to join our 75k+ ML SubReddit.

    🚨 Recommended Open-Source AI Platform: ‘IntellAgent is a An Open-Source Multi-Agent Framework to Evaluate Complex Conversational AI System’ (Promoted)

    The post Unraveling Direct Alignment Algorithms: A Comparative Study on Optimization Strategies for LLM Alignment appeared first on MarkTechPost.

    Source: Read More 

    Facebook Twitter Reddit Email Copy Link
    Previous ArticleProcess Reinforcement through Implicit Rewards (PRIME): A Scalable Machine Learning Framework for Enhancing Reasoning Capabilities
    Next Article New tool – Advanced data-focused fitness logging for athletes

    Related Posts

    Machine Learning

    How to Evaluate Jailbreak Methods: A Case Study with the StrongREJECT Benchmark

    June 4, 2025
    Machine Learning

    A Coding Implementation to Build an Advanced Web Intelligence Agent with Tavily and Gemini AI

    June 4, 2025
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Continue Reading

    Think DeepSeek has cut AI spending? Think again

    News & Updates

    Why I prefer this Lenovo tablet over the iPad for multimedia consumption – and it’s cheaper

    Development

    Shop Team 365 Jackets, Hoodies, and Apparel Wholesale

    Web Development

    I’m trying to be fair to the new Claw AI+ handhelds, but MSI isn’t making it easy

    News & Updates

    Highlights

    CVE-2025-42997 – SAP Gateway Client Information Disclosure

    May 13, 2025

    CVE ID : CVE-2025-42997

    Published : May 13, 2025, 1:15 a.m. | 1 hour, 49 minutes ago

    Description : Under certain conditions, SAP Gateway Client allows a high-privileged user to access restricted information beyond the scope of the application. Due to the possibility of influencing application behavior or performance through misuse of the exposed data, this may potentially lead to low impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

    Severity: 6.6 | MEDIUM

    Visit the link for more details, such as CVSS details, affected products, timeline, and more…

    How to use Google Wallet – and why you should already

    June 26, 2024

    CVE-2025-43571 – Substance3D Use After Free Vulnerability

    May 13, 2025

    Cybercriminals Exploit Free Software Lures to Deploy Hijack Loader and Vidar Stealer

    June 18, 2024
    © DevStackTips 2025. All rights reserved.
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.