Policy Filtration for RLHF to Mitigate Noise in Reward Models

Fuente: arXiv
Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Chuheng, Shen, Wei, Zhao, Li, Zhang, Xuyun, Xu, Xiaolong, Dou, Wanchun, Bian, Jiang
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2024
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866909641296838656
author Zhang, Chuheng
Shen, Wei
Zhao, Li
Zhang, Xuyun
Xu, Xiaolong
Dou, Wanchun
Bian, Jiang
author_facet Zhang, Chuheng
Shen, Wei
Zhao, Li
Zhang, Xuyun
Xu, Xiaolong
Dou, Wanchun
Bian, Jiang
contents While direct policy optimization methods exist, pioneering LLMs are fine-tuned with reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) to generate better responses under the supervision of a reward model learned from preference data. One major challenge of RLHF is the inaccuracy of the intermediate reward model, especially in the tasks that requires complex reasoning for the reward model to score a response. We find that the reliability of the reward model varies across responses assigned with different rewards. This motivates us to filter the samples whose rewards may be unreliable to improve the signal-to-noise ratio during policy learning, resulting in Policy Filtration for Proximal Policy Optimization (PF-PPO). To choose a proper policy filtering strategy, we use the coefficient of determination (R2) between the rewards and actual scores on filtered samples as the metrics to help us find promising strategies since it measures how well the rewards filtered by PF-PPO indicate real performance. We provide extensive experiments to validate the effectiveness of PF-PPO in code generation and math reasoning tasks. In code generation, PF-PPO achieves the state-of-the-art performance of 7-billion-parameter models on HumanEval (+7.9%), MBPP (+0.7%), and LeetCode Contest (+10.0%) which is a more challenging benchmark created by us. In math reasoning, PF-PPO yields performance increase using different reward models and benchmarks (Ape210K and CMATH). Code is available on https://github.com/DtYXs/verl/tree/pf-ppo.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2409_06957
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Policy Filtration for RLHF to Mitigate Noise in Reward Models
Zhang, Chuheng
Shen, Wei
Zhao, Li
Zhang, Xuyun
Xu, Xiaolong
Dou, Wanchun
Bian, Jiang
Machine Learning
Artificial Intelligence
While direct policy optimization methods exist, pioneering LLMs are fine-tuned with reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) to generate better responses under the supervision of a reward model learned from preference data. One major challenge of RLHF is the inaccuracy of the intermediate reward model, especially in the tasks that requires complex reasoning for the reward model to score a response. We find that the reliability of the reward model varies across responses assigned with different rewards. This motivates us to filter the samples whose rewards may be unreliable to improve the signal-to-noise ratio during policy learning, resulting in Policy Filtration for Proximal Policy Optimization (PF-PPO). To choose a proper policy filtering strategy, we use the coefficient of determination (R2) between the rewards and actual scores on filtered samples as the metrics to help us find promising strategies since it measures how well the rewards filtered by PF-PPO indicate real performance. We provide extensive experiments to validate the effectiveness of PF-PPO in code generation and math reasoning tasks. In code generation, PF-PPO achieves the state-of-the-art performance of 7-billion-parameter models on HumanEval (+7.9%), MBPP (+0.7%), and LeetCode Contest (+10.0%) which is a more challenging benchmark created by us. In math reasoning, PF-PPO yields performance increase using different reward models and benchmarks (Ape210K and CMATH). Code is available on https://github.com/DtYXs/verl/tree/pf-ppo.
title Policy Filtration for RLHF to Mitigate Noise in Reward Models
topic Machine Learning
Artificial Intelligence
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.06957