Variational Best-of-N Alignment
Afra Amini, Tim Vieira, Elliott Ash, Ryan Cotterell

TL;DR
This paper introduces variational Best-of-N (vBoN), a method to efficiently approximate the Best-of-N alignment algorithm for language models by fine-tuning models to mimic BoN, reducing inference costs while maintaining high performance.
Contribution
The paper derives the distribution induced by BoN and proposes a variational fine-tuning approach to approximate it, significantly reducing inference costs.
Findings
vBoN closely approximates BoN performance
vBoN outperforms standard KL-based fine-tuning methods
vBoN achieves high rewards across tasks and sampling temperatures
Abstract
Best-of-N (BoN) is a popular and effective algorithm for aligning language models to human preferences. The algorithm works as follows: at inference time, N samples are drawn from the language model, and the sample with the highest reward, as judged by a reward model, is returned as the output. Despite its effectiveness, BoN is computationally expensive; it reduces sampling throughput by a factor of N. To make BoN more efficient at inference time, one strategy is to fine-tune the language model to mimic what BoN does during inference. To achieve this, we derive the distribution induced by the BoN algorithm. We then propose to fine-tune the language model to minimize backward KL divergence to the BoN distribution. Our approach is analogous to mean-field variational inference and, thus, we term it variational BoN (vBoN). To the extent this fine-tuning is successful and we end up with a…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2025 Poster
vBoN is a novel and effective approach converting BoN from an alignment-via-inference algorithm to an alignment-via-fine-tuning algorithm. Models fine tuned with the vBoN objective achieves high reward values closer to the BoN approach, while achieving probabilities closer to the reference model. Importantly, it is as cost-effective as inference on the original reference model. In comparison , the original BoN approach is N times more expensive. Provided theoretical connections showing how vBoN
Section 2 and 3 can be improved significantly by improving the notations and explanations and by bringing important details from Appendix to the main part of the paper. Currently I often find these two sections a bit confusing as well as a bit hard to appreciate some of the claims the authors have made in the paper. For example, in Eq 4, F(r(y)) will be defined as F(r(y) ) = P (r(y) < r(y) ), using Eq 5? With this I am not sure how the vBoN objective is insensitive to applying any monotonically
- The authors conducted rigorous and thorough theoretical derivations in the paper, clarifying the process from the motivation behind the vBo𝑁 proposal to its transformation into an optimizable objective. This is highly beneficial for readers interested in optimization theory and can provide new insights for tackling more complex optimization problems. - The vBo𝑁 method is highly effective. Moreover, despite the substantial theoretical derivations, the illustrations used by the authors to presen
- Less Persuasive Experiments: While we understand that conducting RLHF is always exceedingly costly, for instance, PPO requires maintaining four sets of model parameters, the fact that the validation of the vBo𝑁 method was only focused on movie review completion and text summarization datasets makes it lacks persuasiveness. We would like to understand the potential applications of vBo𝑁 in broader and more challenging tasks, such as code generation, mathematical problem solving, and multi-step r
The motivation of this article is quite clear, and it includes several experiments to support its claims. Additionally, the overall structure of the article is fairly complete, including some theoretical derivations.
1. The effectiveness of the vBon method is questionable. Although vBon utilizes reward model scoring to depict a target distribution closer to BoN, it requires a large number of samples (controlled by N or M in the article) to generate the corresponding preference data. The efficiency of this method is not high when the sample size is large. 2. The paper is hard to follow. Some definitions lack explanation and need clarification from the authors, such as the function F(.) used in Equations 4 and
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsTopic Modeling · Recommender Systems and Techniques · Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
MethodsVariational Inference
