TL;DR
This paper introduces Pareto-Lenient Consensus (PLC), a game-theoretic framework that enables multi-preference alignment of large language models by dynamically negotiating trade-offs, escaping local optima, and approaching Pareto optimality.
Contribution
The paper proposes PLC, a novel negotiation-based method for multi-preference alignment that overcomes limitations of static scalarization and gradient projection approaches.
Findings
PLC can escape local Pareto-stationary points.
PLC outperforms baseline methods in Pareto frontier quality.
Theoretical analysis confirms convergence to Pareto consensus.
Abstract
Transcending the single-preference paradigm, aligning LLMs with diverse human values is pivotal for robust deployment. Contemporary Multi-Objective Preference Alignment (MPA) approaches predominantly rely on static linear scalarization or rigid gradient projection to navigate these trade-offs. However, by enforcing strict conflict avoidance or simultaneous descent, these paradigms often prematurely converge to local stationary points. While mathematically stable, these points represent a conservative compromise where the model sacrifices potential global Pareto improvements to avoid transient local trade-offs. To break this deadlock, we propose Pareto-Lenient Consensus (PLC), a game-theoretic framework that reimagines alignment as a dynamic negotiation process. Unlike rigid approaches, PLC introduces consensus-driven lenient gradient rectification, which dynamically tolerates local…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
