analiza aiqbench
This theory paper extends preference-based reinforcement learning, where models learn from human pairwise comparisons of trajectories, to allow an "incomparable" label when neither option dominates. It shows that under multiple objectives, no model meeting the stated desiderata has a convex negative log-likelihood in the utility difference, which limits standard optimization guarantees. For practitioners, the main takeaway is that multi-objective preference learning carries a non-vanishing error term and needs different modeling assumptions than single-reward RLHF pipelines.
On Generalizing Preference-based Reinforcement Learning to Multi-Objective Problems
arXiv:2607.11432v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We study reinforcement learning (RL) from pairwise human-generated trajectory comparisons. We generalize preference-based RL by formalizing a novel setting in which the expert can also label trajectory pairs as incomparable when neither trajectory "dominates" the other. We introduce the learning problem and the desiderata that a model should satisfy, showing that, when multiple objectives are present, no compliant model admits a negative log-likelihood that is convex in the utility difference. Then, we propose a novel Bradley-Terry-inspired rationality model that enables incomparability and infers a multi-dimensional reward function, and discuss its compliance with the desiderata. We upper bound the divergence between the true and learned comparison distributions when a dataset is available, separating the rate of approach to the optimum from a non-vanishing term due to non-convexity. Then, we study how learned parameters affect downstream guarantees, highlighting the impact of invariance on Pareto optimality.
Abstract:We study reinforcement learning (RL) from pairwise human-generated trajectory comparisons. We generalize preference-based RL by formalizing a novel setting in which the expert can also label trajectory pairs as incomparable when neither trajectory "dominates" the other. We introduce the learning problem and the desiderata that a model should satisfy, showing that, when multiple objectives are present, no compliant model admits a negative log-likelihood that is convex in the utility difference. Then, we propose a novel Bradley-Terry-inspired rationality model that enables incomparability and infers a multi-dimensional reward function, and discuss its compliance with the desiderata. We upper bound the divergence between the true and learned comparison distributions when a dataset is available, separating the rate of approach to the optimum from a non-vanishing term due to non-convexity. Then, we study how learned parameters affect downstream guarantees, highlighting the impact of invariance on Pareto optimality.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2607.11432 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2607.11432v2 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.11432 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 235 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

The Alignment Problem: Computer Science Meets Analytic Philosophy
LessWrong · 18 oct. 2026
The Continual Constitutional Convention: How language models revise the documents that govern them
AI Alignment Forum · 13 oct. 2026

[AINews] The Future of Latent Space
Latent Space · 25 sept. 2026

[AINews] Reality Checks on AI News (Yegge shuts down Gas Town, Databricks’ +60% Astra cost)
Latent Space · 17 sept. 2026