DSTC: Direct Preference Learning with Only Self-Generated Tests and Code to Improve Code LMs

Direct preference learning offers a promising and computation-efficient beyond supervised fine-tuning (SFT) for improving code generation in coding large language models (LMs). However, the scarcity of reliable preference data is a bottleneck for the performance of direct preference learning to improve the coding accuracy of code LMs. In this paper, we introduce \underline{\textbf{D}}irect Preference Learning with Only \underline{\textbf{S}}elf-Generated \underline{\textbf{T}}ests and \underline{\textbf{C}}ode (DSTC), a framework that leverages only self-generated code snippets and tests to construct reliable preference pairs such that direct preference learning can improve LM coding accuracy without external annotations. DSTC combines a minimax selection process and test-code concatenation to improve preference pair quality, reducing the influence of incorrect self-generated tests and enhancing model performance without the need for costly reward models. When applied with direct preference learning methods such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and Kahneman-Tversky Optimization (KTO), DSTC yields stable improvements in coding accuracy (pass@1 score) across diverse coding benchmarks, including HumanEval, MBPP, and BigCodeBench, demonstrating both its effectiveness and scalability for models of various sizes. This approach autonomously enhances code generation accuracy across LLMs of varying sizes, reducing reliance on expensive annotated coding datasets.

Reward-Augmented Data Enhances Direct Preference Alignment of LLMs

Preference alignment in Large Language Models (LLMs) has significantly improved their ability to adhere to human instructions and intentions. However, existing direct alignment algorithms primarily focus on relative preferences and often overlook the qualitative aspects of responses. Striving to maximize the implicit reward gap between the chosen and the slightly inferior rejected responses can cause overfitting and unnecessary unlearning of the high-quality rejected responses. The unawareness of the reward scores also drives the LLM to indiscriminately favor the low-quality chosen responses and fail to generalize to responses with the highest rewards, which are sparse in data. To overcome these shortcomings, our study introduces reward-conditioned LLM policies that discern and learn from the entire spectrum of response quality within the dataset, helping extrapolate to more optimal regions. We propose an effective yet simple data relabeling method that conditions the preference pairs on quality scores to construct a reward-augmented dataset. This dataset is easily integrated with existing direct alignment algorithms and is applicable to any preference dataset. The experimental results across instruction-following benchmarks including AlpacaEval, MT-Bench, and Arena-Hard-Auto demonstrate that our approach consistently boosts the performance of DPO by a considerable margin across diverse models. Additionally, our method improves the average accuracy on various academic benchmarks. When applying our method to on-policy data, the resulting DPO model achieves SOTA results on AlpacaEval. Through ablation studies, we demonstrate that our method not only maximizes the utility of preference data but also mitigates the issue of unlearning, demonstrating its broad effectiveness beyond mere dataset expansion. Our code is available at https://github.com/shenao-zhang/reward-augmented-preference.

Just say what you want: only-prompting self-rewarding online preference optimization

We address the challenge of online Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) with a focus on self-rewarding alignment methods. In online RLHF, obtaining feedback requires interaction with the environment, which can be costly when using additional reward models or the GPT-4 API. Current self-rewarding approaches rely heavily on the discriminator's judgment capabilities, which are effective for large-scale models but challenging to transfer to smaller ones. To address these limitations, we propose a novel, only-prompting self-rewarding online algorithm that generates preference datasets without relying on judgment capabilities. Additionally, we employ fine-grained arithmetic control over the optimality gap between positive and negative examples, generating more hard negatives in the later stages of training to help the model better capture subtle human preferences. Finally, we conduct extensive experiments on two base models, Mistral-7B and Mistral-Instruct-7B, which significantly bootstrap the performance of the reference model, achieving 34.5% in the Length-controlled Win Rates of AlpacaEval 2.0.

Towards Fully Autonomous Research Powered by LLMs: Case Study on Simulations

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has created new opportunities for the automation of scientific research, spanning both experimental processes and computational simulations. This study explores the feasibility of constructing an autonomous simulation agent (ASA) powered by LLM, through sophisticated API integration, to automate the entire research process, from experimental design, remote upload and simulation execution, data analysis, to report compilation. Using a simulation problem of polymer chain conformations as a case study, we assessed the performance of ASAs powered by different LLMs including GPT-4-Turbo. Our findings revealed that ASA-GPT-4o achieved near-flawless execution on designated research missions, underscoring the potential of LLMs to manage complete scientific investigations autonomously. The outlined automation can be iteratively performed up to twenty cycles without human intervention, illustrating the potential of LLMs for large-scale autonomous research endeavors. Additionally, we discussed the intrinsic traits of ASAs in managing extensive tasks, focusing on self-validation mechanisms and the balance between local attention and global oversight.

Toward Optimal LLM Alignments Using Two-Player Games

The standard Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) framework primarily focuses on optimizing the performance of large language models using pre-collected prompts. However, collecting prompts that provide comprehensive coverage is both tedious and challenging, and often fails to include scenarios that LLMs need to improve on the most. In this paper, we investigate alignment through the lens of two-agent games, involving iterative interactions between an adversarial and a defensive agent. The adversarial agent's task at each step is to generate prompts that expose the weakness of the defensive agent. In return, the defensive agent seeks to improve its responses to these newly identified prompts it struggled with, based on feedback from the reward model. We theoretically demonstrate that this iterative reinforcement learning optimization converges to a Nash Equilibrium for the game induced by the agents. Experimental results in safety scenarios demonstrate that learning in such a competitive environment not only fully trains agents but also leads to policies with enhanced generalization capabilities for both adversarial and defensive agents.

Provably Mitigating Overoptimization in RLHF: Your SFT Loss is Implicitly an Adversarial Regularizer

Aligning generative models with human preference via RLHF typically suffers from overoptimization, where an imperfectly learned reward model can misguide the generative model to output undesired responses. We investigate this problem in a principled manner by identifying the source of the misalignment as a form of distributional shift and uncertainty in learning human preferences. To mitigate overoptimization, we first propose a theoretical algorithm that chooses the best policy for an adversarially chosen reward model; one that simultaneously minimizes the maximum likelihood estimation of the loss and a reward penalty term. Here, the reward penalty term is introduced to prevent the policy from choosing actions with spurious high proxy rewards, resulting in provable sample efficiency of the algorithm under a partial coverage style condition. Moving from theory to practice, the proposed algorithm further enjoys an equivalent but surprisingly easy-to-implement reformulation. Using the equivalence between reward models and the corresponding optimal policy, the algorithm features a simple objective that combines: (i) a preference optimization loss that directly aligns the policy with human preference, and (ii) a supervised learning loss that explicitly imitates the policy with a (suitable) baseline distribution. In the context of aligning large language models (LLM), this objective fuses the direct preference optimization (DPO) loss with the supervised fune-tuning (SFT) loss to help mitigate the overoptimization towards undesired responses, for which we name the algorithm Regularized Preference Optimization (RPO). Experiments of aligning LLMs demonstrate the improved performance of RPO compared with DPO baselines. Our work sheds light on the interplay between preference optimization and SFT in tuning LLMs with both theoretical guarantees and empirical evidence.

Can Large Language Models Play Games? A Case Study of A Self-Play Approach

Large Language Models (LLMs) harness extensive data from the Internet, storing a broad spectrum of prior knowledge. While LLMs have proven beneficial as decision-making aids, their reliability is hampered by limitations in reasoning, hallucination phenomenon, and so on. On the other hand, Monte-Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) is a heuristic search algorithm that provides reliable decision-making solutions, achieved through recursive rollouts and self-play. However, the effectiveness of MCTS relies heavily on heuristic pruning and external value functions, particularly in complex decision scenarios. This work introduces an innovative approach that bolsters LLMs with MCTS self-play to efficiently resolve deterministic turn-based zero-sum games (DTZG), such as chess and go, without the need for additional training. Specifically, we utilize LLMs as both action pruners and proxies for value functions without the need for additional training. We theoretically prove that the suboptimality of the estimated value in our proposed method scales with $\tilde{\mathcal O}\Bigl(\frac{|\tilde {\mathcal A}|}{\sqrt{N}} + \epsilon_\mathrm{pruner} + \epsilon_\mathrm{critic}\Bigr)$, where \(N\) is the number of simulations, $|\tilde {\mathcal A}|$ is the cardinality of the pruned action space by LLM, and $\epsilon_\mathrm{pruner}$ and $\epsilon_\mathrm{critic}$ quantify the errors incurred by adopting LLMs as action space pruner and value function proxy, respectively. Our experiments in chess and go demonstrate the capability of our method to address challenges beyond the scope of MCTS and improve the performance of the directly application of LLMs.

How Can LLM Guide RL? A Value-Based Approach

Reinforcement learning (RL) has become the de facto standard practice for sequential decision-making problems by improving future acting policies with feedback. However, RL algorithms may require extensive trial-and-error interactions to collect useful feedback for improvement. On the other hand, recent developments in large language models (LLMs) have showcased impressive capabilities in language understanding and generation, yet they fall short in exploration and self-improvement capabilities for planning tasks, lacking the ability to autonomously refine their responses based on feedback. Therefore, in this paper, we study how the policy prior provided by the LLM can enhance the sample efficiency of RL algorithms. Specifically, we develop an algorithm named LINVIT that incorporates LLM guidance as a regularization factor in value-based RL, leading to significant reductions in the amount of data needed for learning, particularly when the difference between the ideal policy and the LLM-informed policy is small, which suggests that the initial policy is close to optimal, reducing the need for further exploration. Additionally, we present a practical algorithm SLINVIT that simplifies the construction of the value function and employs subgoals to reduce the search complexity. Our experiments across three interactive environments ALFWorld, InterCode, and BlocksWorld demonstrate that our method achieves state-of-the-art success rates and also surpasses previous RL and LLM approaches in terms of sample efficiency. Our code is available at https://github.com/agentification/Language-Integrated-VI.

A Principled Framework for Knowledge-enhanced Large Language Model

Large Language Models (LLMs) are versatile, yet they often falter in tasks requiring deep and reliable reasoning due to issues like hallucinations, limiting their applicability in critical scenarios. This paper introduces a rigorously designed framework for creating LLMs that effectively anchor knowledge and employ a closed-loop reasoning process, enhancing their capability for in-depth analysis. We dissect the framework to illustrate the contribution of each component to the LLMs' performance, offering a theoretical assurance of improved reasoning under well-defined assumptions.

Reason for Future, Act for Now: A Principled Framework for Autonomous LLM Agents with Provable Sample Efficiency

Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive reasoning abilities, but translating reasoning into actions in the real world remains challenging. In particular, it remains unclear how to complete a given task provably within a minimum number of interactions with the external environment, e.g., through an internal mechanism of reasoning. To this end, we propose a principled framework with provable regret guarantees to orchestrate reasoning and acting, which we call "reason for future, act for now" (\texttt{RAFA}). Specifically, we design a prompt template for reasoning that learns from the memory buffer and plans a future trajectory over a long horizon ("reason for future"). At each step, the LLM agent takes the initial action of the planned trajectory ("act for now"), stores the collected feedback in the memory buffer, and reinvokes the reasoning routine to replan the future trajectory from the new state. The key idea is to cast reasoning in LLMs as learning and planning in Bayesian adaptive Markov decision processes (MDPs). Correspondingly, we prompt LLMs to form an updated posterior of the unknown environment from the memory buffer (learning) and generate an optimal trajectory for multiple future steps that maximizes a value function (planning). The learning and planning subroutines are performed in an "in-context" manner to emulate the actor-critic update for MDPs. Our theoretical analysis proves that the novel combination of long-term reasoning and short-term acting achieves a $\sqrt{T}$ regret. In particular, the regret bound highlights an intriguing interplay between the prior knowledge obtained through pretraining and the uncertainty reduction achieved by reasoning and acting. Our empirical validation shows that it outperforms various existing frameworks and achieves nearly perfect scores on a few benchmarks.