Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Liu, Sijia, Muennighoff, Niklas, Ethayarajh, Kawin
Format: Preprint
Published: 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.24207
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866914426182959104
author Liu, Sijia
Muennighoff, Niklas
Ethayarajh, Kawin
author_facet Liu, Sijia
Muennighoff, Niklas
Ethayarajh, Kawin
contents Online alignment (e.g., GRPO) is generally more performant than offline alignment (e.g., DPO) -- but why? Drawing on prospect theory from behavioral economics, we propose a human-centric explanation. We prove that online on-policy sampling better approximates the human-perceived distribution of what the model can produce, and PPO/GRPO-style clipping -- originally introduced to just stabilize training -- recovers a perceptual bias in how humans perceive probability. In this sense, PPO/GRPO act as perceptual losses already. Our theory further suggests that the online/offline dichotomy is itself incidental to maximizing human utility, since we can achieve the same effect by selectively training on any data in a manner that mimics human perception, rather than restricting ourselves to online on-policy data. Doing so would allow us to post-train more quickly, cheaply, and flexibly without sacrificing performance. To this end, we propose a design pattern that explicitly incorporates perceptual distortions of probability into objectives like DPO/KTO/GRPO, creating humanline variants of them. Surprisingly, we find that these humanline variants, even when trained with offline off-policy data, can match the performance of their online counterparts (on both verifiable and unverifiable tasks) while running up to 6x faster.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_24207
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Humanline: Online Alignment as Perceptual Loss
Liu, Sijia
Muennighoff, Niklas
Ethayarajh, Kawin
Artificial Intelligence
Online alignment (e.g., GRPO) is generally more performant than offline alignment (e.g., DPO) -- but why? Drawing on prospect theory from behavioral economics, we propose a human-centric explanation. We prove that online on-policy sampling better approximates the human-perceived distribution of what the model can produce, and PPO/GRPO-style clipping -- originally introduced to just stabilize training -- recovers a perceptual bias in how humans perceive probability. In this sense, PPO/GRPO act as perceptual losses already. Our theory further suggests that the online/offline dichotomy is itself incidental to maximizing human utility, since we can achieve the same effect by selectively training on any data in a manner that mimics human perception, rather than restricting ourselves to online on-policy data. Doing so would allow us to post-train more quickly, cheaply, and flexibly without sacrificing performance. To this end, we propose a design pattern that explicitly incorporates perceptual distortions of probability into objectives like DPO/KTO/GRPO, creating humanline variants of them. Surprisingly, we find that these humanline variants, even when trained with offline off-policy data, can match the performance of their online counterparts (on both verifiable and unverifiable tasks) while running up to 6x faster.
title Humanline: Online Alignment as Perceptual Loss
topic Artificial Intelligence
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.24207