Statistical Impossibility and Possibility of Aligning LLMs with Human Preferences: From Condorcet Paradox to Nash Equilibrium
Aligning large language models (LLMs) with diverse human preferences is critical for ensuring fairness and informed outcomes when deploying these models for decision-making. In this paper, we seek to uncover fundamental statistical limits concerning aligning LLMs with human preferences, with a focus on the probabilistic representation of human preferences and the preservation of diverse preferences in aligned LLMs. We first show that human preferences can be represented by a reward model if and only if the preference among LLM-generated responses is free of any Condorcet cycle. Moreover, we prove that Condorcet cycles exist with probability converging to one exponentially fast under a probabilistic preference model, thereby demonstrating the impossibility of fully aligning human preferences using reward-based approaches such as reinforcement learning from human feedback. Next, we explore the conditions under which LLMs would employ mixed strategies -- meaning they do not collapse to a single response -- when aligned in the limit using a non-reward-based approach, such as Nash learning from human feedback (NLHF). We identify a necessary and sufficient condition for mixed strategies: the absence of a response that is preferred over all others by a majority. As a blessing, we prove that this condition holds with high probability under the probabilistic preference model, thereby highlighting the statistical possibility of preserving minority preferences without explicit regularization in aligning LLMs. Finally, we leverage insights from our statistical results to design a novel, computationally efficient algorithm for finding Nash equilibria in aligning LLMs with NLHF. Our experiments show that Llama-3.2-1B, aligned with our algorithm, achieves a win rate of 60.55\% against the base model.
Code (1)
Tasks
FairnessMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
The Alignment Trap: Complexity Barriers
This paper argues that AI alignment is not merely difficult, but is founded on a fundamental logical contradiction. We first establish The Enumeration Paradox: we use machine learning precisely because we cannot enumerat…
Mathematical ProofsFundamental Limits of Game-Theoretic LLM Alignment: Smith Consistency and Preference Matching
Nash Learning from Human Feedback is a game-theoretic framework for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences by modeling learning as a two-player zero-sum game. However, using raw preference as the pa…
DiversityAI Alignment and Social Choice: Fundamental Limitations and Policy Implications
Aligning AI agents to human intentions and values is a key bottleneck in building safe and deployable AI applications. But whose values should AI agents be aligned with? Reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) …
The Possibility of Fairness: Revisiting the Impossibility Theorem in Practice
The ``impossibility theorem'' -- which is considered foundational in algorithmic fairness literature -- asserts that there must be trade-offs between common notions of fairness and performance when fitting statistical mo…
FairnessAn Introductory Guide to Fano's Inequality with Applications in Statistical Estimation
Information theory plays an indispensable role in the development of algorithm-independent impossibility results, both for communication problems and for seemingly distinct areas such as statistics and machine learning. …
Density EstimationModel Selectionregression