paper.dinq.meAI 与前沿科学顶会 · 学术新星雷达
登录 DINQ
返回新星榜
YN

Yijin Ni

COLM 2026对齐与偏好多模态数据与预训练
新星分新星
51
一作贡献30
核心/参与0
方向广度6
合作网络3
1 一作 · 1 篇 · COLM 2026

获取完整研究档案

首次获取该候选人的完整档案及 StartLux 评估共 20 积分;每位用户单独解锁,之后查看免费。主动刷新 20 积分。

联系方式

实时查找电子邮箱,费用不超过20积分;未找到邮箱不扣费。

2026 顶会论文

1
一作COLM 2026Poster· Poster Session 5· Imperial Ballroom· #30

Overconfident and Blind to Details: Fixing Prompt Insensitivity with Abductive Preference Learning

Yijin Ni · Simon Yu · Peng Qi

We introduce abductive preference learning, optimizing the abductive policy π(x | y) instead of π(y | x). This boosts long-tail prompt sensitivity and reduces overconfidence in LLMs and VLMs without sacrificing general capability.

摘要

Vision and language models frequently ignore semantically critical input edits, defaulting to pretraining priors. For example, models will confidently assert a five-legged dog has four legs; consequently, on the VLMBias benchmark, GPT 5.2 and Claude Sonnet 4.6 achieve only $4.6\%$ and $0\%$ accuracy, respectively. Existing methods address this problem through building up datasets that covers the underrepresented inputs to tune the policy function $\pi(y \mid x)$, where $x$ and $y$ refer to input prompts and responses, respectively. However, prompting baselines yield gains of under $3\%$ on VLMBias due to the low probability density of rare prompts. To bypass this bottleneck, we propose \emph{abductive preference learning} to optimize the abductive policy $\pi(x \mid y)$. We prove this amplifies forward policy improvements by a factor of $q(y)/p(x)$, where $p(\cdot)$ and $q(\cdot)$ denote the marginal probabilities of the prompt and response, yielding the largest gains on the rarest prompts. Furthermore, we demonstrate that for translation invariant pairwise preference learning methods, such as DPO, estimating $\pi(x \mid y)$ reduces to a structural data swap that compares prompts for a fixed response, requiring no architectural changes. Empirically, abductive preference learning delivers large gains on long-tail prompt sensitivity: on VLMBias, A-DPO raises accuracy from $3\%$ to $44\%$ ($14\times$), outperforming GPT-5.2 ($4.6\%$) and all closed-source VLMs except Gemini-3-Flash; on Inverse-IFEval, Multi-DPOP reaches $65$--$84\%$, surpassing GPT-5 ($73.7\%$) at the 9B scale while preserving IFBench, unlike DPO which degrades it by $8$--$12\%$.

对齐与偏好多模态数据与预训练abductive preference learningoverconfidenceDPOpreference optimizationOpenReview

常见合作者