Pressure, What Pressure? Sycophancy Disentanglement in Language Models via Reward Decomposition
Large language models exhibit sycophancy, the tendency to shift their stated positions toward perceived user preferences or authority cues regardless of evidence. Standard alignment methods fail to correct this because scalar reward models conflate two distinct failure modes into a single signal: pressure capitulation, where the model changes a correct answer under social pressure, and evidence blindness, where the model ignores the provided context entirely. We operationalise sycophancy through formal definitions of pressure independence and evidence responsiveness, serving as a working framework for disentangled training rather than a definitive characterisation of the phenomenon. We propose the first approach to sycophancy reduction via reward decomposition, introducing a multi-component Group Relative Policy Optimisation (GRPO) reward that decomposes the training signal into five terms: pressure resistance, context fidelity, position consistency, agreement suppression, and factual correctness. We train using a contrastive dataset pairing pressure-free baselines with pressured variants across three authority levels and two opposing evidence contexts. Across five base models, our two-phase pipeline consistently reduces sycophancy on all metric axes, with ablations confirming that each reward term governs an independent behavioural dimension. The learned resistance to pressure generalises beyond our training methodology and prompt structure, reducing answer-priming sycophancy by up to 17 points on SycophancyEval despite the absence of such pressure forms during training.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Decomposing Factual Sycophancy in Language Models: How Size and Instruction Tuning Shape Robustness
Factual sycophancy occurs when a language model abandons a correct, verifiable answer under social pressure. Because a flip occurs only when pressure toward a false answer exceeds the model's neutral preference for the t…
Sycophancy under Pressure: Evaluating and Mitigating Sycophantic Bias via Adversarial Dialogues in Scientific QA
Large language models (LLMs), while increasingly used in domains requiring factual rigor, often display a troubling behavior: sycophancy, the tendency to align with user beliefs regardless of correctness. This tendency i…
Question AnsweringSWAY: A Counterfactual Computational Linguistic Approach to Measuring and Mitigating Sycophancy
Large language models exhibit sycophancy: the tendency to shift outputs toward user-expressed stances, regardless of correctness or consistency. While prior work has studied this issue and its impacts, rigorous computati…
To Agree or To Be Right? The Grounding-Sycophancy Tradeoff in Medical Vision-Language Models
Vision-language models (VLMs) adapted to the medical domain have shown strong performance on visual question answering benchmarks, yet their robustness against two critical failure modes, hallucination and sycophancy, re…
Visual Question AnsweringSycophancy is an Educational Safety Risk: Why LLM Tutors Need Sycophancy Benchmarks
This position paper argues that effective tutoring requires corrective friction: surfacing misconceptions and challenging them supportively to drive conceptual change. Yet preference-aligned LLMs can trade epistemic rigo…