@inproceedings{saeidi-etal-2025-insights,
title = "Insights into Alignment: Evaluating {DPO} and its Variants Across Multiple Tasks",
author = "Saeidi, Amir and
Verma, Shivanshu and
Uddin, Md Nayem and
Baral, Chitta",
editor = "Zhao, Jin and
Wang, Mingyang and
Liu, Zhu",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)",
month = jul,
year = "2025",
address = "Vienna, Austria",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-srw.26/",
doi = "10.18653/v1/2025.acl-srw.26",
pages = "409--421",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-254-1",
abstract = "This study evaluates Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and its variants for aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences, testing three configurations: (1) with Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), (2) without SFT, and (3) without SFT but using an instruction-tuned model. We further investigate how training set size influences model performance. Our evaluation spans 13 benchmarks{---}covering dialogue, reasoning, mathematical problem-solving, question answering, truthfulness, MT-Bench, Big Bench, and the Open LLM Leaderboard. We find that: (1) alignment methods often achieve near-optimal performance even with smaller subsets of training data; (2) although they offer limited improvements on complex reasoning tasks, they enhance mathematical problem-solving; and (3) using an instruction-tuned model improves truthfulness. These insights highlight the conditions under which alignment methods excel, as well as their limitations."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="saeidi-etal-2025-insights">
<titleInfo>
<title>Insights into Alignment: Evaluating DPO and its Variants Across Multiple Tasks</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Amir</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Saeidi</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Shivanshu</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Verma</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Md</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Nayem</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Uddin</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Chitta</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Baral</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2025-07</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jin</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zhao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Mingyang</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Zhu</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Liu</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Vienna, Austria</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-254-1</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>This study evaluates Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and its variants for aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences, testing three configurations: (1) with Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), (2) without SFT, and (3) without SFT but using an instruction-tuned model. We further investigate how training set size influences model performance. Our evaluation spans 13 benchmarks—covering dialogue, reasoning, mathematical problem-solving, question answering, truthfulness, MT-Bench, Big Bench, and the Open LLM Leaderboard. We find that: (1) alignment methods often achieve near-optimal performance even with smaller subsets of training data; (2) although they offer limited improvements on complex reasoning tasks, they enhance mathematical problem-solving; and (3) using an instruction-tuned model improves truthfulness. These insights highlight the conditions under which alignment methods excel, as well as their limitations.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">saeidi-etal-2025-insights</identifier>
<identifier type="doi">10.18653/v1/2025.acl-srw.26</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-srw.26/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2025-07</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>409</start>
<end>421</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Insights into Alignment: Evaluating DPO and its Variants Across Multiple Tasks
%A Saeidi, Amir
%A Verma, Shivanshu
%A Uddin, Md Nayem
%A Baral, Chitta
%Y Zhao, Jin
%Y Wang, Mingyang
%Y Liu, Zhu
%S Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)
%D 2025
%8 July
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Vienna, Austria
%@ 979-8-89176-254-1
%F saeidi-etal-2025-insights
%X This study evaluates Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and its variants for aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences, testing three configurations: (1) with Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), (2) without SFT, and (3) without SFT but using an instruction-tuned model. We further investigate how training set size influences model performance. Our evaluation spans 13 benchmarks—covering dialogue, reasoning, mathematical problem-solving, question answering, truthfulness, MT-Bench, Big Bench, and the Open LLM Leaderboard. We find that: (1) alignment methods often achieve near-optimal performance even with smaller subsets of training data; (2) although they offer limited improvements on complex reasoning tasks, they enhance mathematical problem-solving; and (3) using an instruction-tuned model improves truthfulness. These insights highlight the conditions under which alignment methods excel, as well as their limitations.
%R 10.18653/v1/2025.acl-srw.26
%U https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-srw.26/
%U https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-srw.26
%P 409-421
Markdown (Informal)
[Insights into Alignment: Evaluating DPO and its Variants Across Multiple Tasks](https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-srw.26/) (Saeidi et al., ACL 2025)
ACL