SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2510.15514

Voting with the Graph: Stable RLAIF via Topological Consistency Maximization

Abstract

Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF) relies on LLM judges as preference measurement instruments, yet these instruments are fundamentally limited by random measurement errors -- stochastic fluctuations that manifest as preference cycles (e.g., $A \succ B \succ C \succ A$), occurring in 5-9% of evaluations across state-of-the-art models. While repeated sampling mitigates noise by averaging multiple judgments, it treats each comparison in isolation and fails to exploit the structural constraints that distinguish systematic signals from random noise. We introduce Topological Consensus Rewards (TCR), a framework that leverages transitivity as a denoising mechanism via topological majority voting: systematic signals reinforce each other through transitive chains, while random errors cluster into topologically exposed cycles. TCR approximates the Maximum Acyclic Subgraph to filter stochastic noise from preference signals. We also propose Cycle Incidence Rate (CIR) as a diagnostic metric that measures the proportion of samples containing preference cycles. Under our noise model, these cycles arise primarily from stochastic measurement errors rather than genuine intransitivity. Experiments on Arena-Hard, MT-Bench, and WritingBench demonstrate that TCR consistently outperforms pairwise baselines and classical ranking algorithms, while exhibiting robust performance across different judge models.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Boyin Liu, Zhuo Zhang, Sen Huang, Lipeng Xie, Qingxu Fu, Haoran Chen, LI YU, Tianyi Hu, Zhaoyang Liu, Bolin Ding, Dongbin Zhao. 2025-10-17. Voting with the Graph: Stable RLAIF via Topological Consistency Maximization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.15514

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI