























Abstract:A recurring challenge in preference fine-tuning (PFT) is handling $\textit{intransitive}$ (i.e., cyclic) preferences. Intransitive preferences often stem from either $\textit{(i)}$ inconsistent rankings along a single objective or $\textit{(ii)}$ scalarizing multiple objectives into a single metric. Regardless of their source, the downstream implication of intransitive preferences is the same: there is no well-defined optimal policy, breaking a core assumption of the standard PFT pipeline. In response, we propose a novel, game-theoretic solution concept, the $\textit{Maximum Entropy Blackwell Winner}$ ($\textit{MaxEntBW}$), that is well-defined under multi-objective intransitive preferences. To enable computing MaxEntBWs at scale, we derive $\texttt{PROSPER}$: a provably efficient PFT algorithm. Unlike prior self-play techniques, $\texttt{PROSPER}$ directly handles multiple objectives without requiring scalarization. We then apply $\texttt{PROSPER}$ to the problem of fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) from multi-objective LLM-as-a-Judge feedback (e.g., rubric-based judges), a setting where both sources of intransitivity arise. We find that $\texttt{PROSPER}$ outperforms all baselines considered across both instruction following and general chat benchmarks, releasing trained model checkpoints at the 7B and 3B parameter scales.
| Comments: | 24 pages, 5 figures |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2602.19041 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2602.19041v2 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2602.19041 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite |
From: Jiahao Zhang [view email]
[v1]
Sun, 22 Feb 2026 04:33:51 UTC (392 KB)
[v2]
Tue, 5 May 2026 18:48:00 UTC (401 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。