Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Hanshan Zhang
dblp:331/9514
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Reinforcement learning · 44% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 44% Language models and text generation · 13% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › nonmonotonic reasoning › preference handling
preference modeling |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Energy-Based Preference Model Offers Better Offline Alignment than the Bradley-Terry Preference Model · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reinforcement learning from human feedback |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Energy-Based Preference Model Offers Better Offline Alignment than the Bradley-Terry Preference Model · ICML 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › alignment
offline alignment |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Energy-Based Preference Model Offers Better Offline Alignment than the Bradley-Terry Preference Model · ICML 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
maximum likelihood estimation · 0.9energy-based model · 0.9DPO · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Energy-Based Preference Model Offers Better Offline Alignment than the Bradley-Terry Preference ModelabstractSince the debut of DPO, it has been shown that aligning a target LLM with human preferences via the KL-constrained RLHF loss is mathematically equivalent to a special kind of reward modeling task. Concretely, the task requires: 1) using the target LLM to parameterize the reward model, and 2) tuning the reward model so that it has a 1:1 linear relationship with the true reward. However, we identify a significant issue: the DPO loss might have multiple minimizers, of which only one satisfies the required linearity condition. The problem arises from a well-known issue of the underlying Bradley-Terry preference model: it does not always have a unique maximum likelihood estimator (MLE). Consequently, the minimizer of the RLHF loss might be unattainable because it is merely one among many minimizers of the DPO loss. As a better alternative, we propose an energy-based preference model (EBM) that always has a unique MLE, inherently satisfying the linearity requirement. To showcase the practical utility of replacing BTM with our EBM in the context of offline alignment, we adapt a simple yet scalable objective function from the recent literature on fitting EBM and name it as Energy Preference Alignment (EPA). Empirically, we demonstrate that EPA consistently delivers better performance on open benchmarks compared to DPO, thereby validating the theoretical superiority of our EBM. Yuzhong Hong, Hanshan Zhang, Junwei Bao 0001, Hongfei Jiang, Yang Song 0021 |
ICML | 2 |