LGJan 28
Reinforcement Learning via Self-DistillationJonas Hübotter, Frederike Lübeck, Lejs Behric et al.
Large language models are increasingly post-trained with reinforcement learning in verifiable domains such as code and math. Yet, current methods for reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) learn only from a scalar outcome reward per attempt, creating a severe credit-assignment bottleneck. Many verifiable environments actually provide rich textual feedback, such as runtime errors or judge evaluations, that explain why an attempt failed. We formalize this setting as reinforcement learning with rich feedback and introduce Self-Distillation Policy Optimization (SDPO), which converts tokenized feedback into a dense learning signal without any external teacher or explicit reward model. SDPO treats the current model conditioned on feedback as a self-teacher and distills its feedback-informed next-token predictions back into the policy. In this way, SDPO leverages the model's ability to retrospectively identify its own mistakes in-context. Across scientific reasoning, tool use, and competitive programming on LiveCodeBench v6, SDPO improves sample efficiency and final accuracy over strong RLVR baselines. Notably, SDPO also outperforms baselines in standard RLVR environments that only return scalar feedback by using successful rollouts as implicit feedback for failed attempts. Finally, applying SDPO to individual questions at test time accelerates discovery on difficult binary-reward tasks, achieving the same discovery probability as best-of-k sampling or multi-turn conversations with 3x fewer attempts.
LGFeb 21, 2023
Minimax-Bayes Reinforcement LearningThomas Kleine Buening, Christos Dimitrakakis, Hannes Eriksson et al.
While the Bayesian decision-theoretic framework offers an elegant solution to the problem of decision making under uncertainty, one question is how to appropriately select the prior distribution. One idea is to employ a worst-case prior. However, this is not as easy to specify in sequential decision making as in simple statistical estimation problems. This paper studies (sometimes approximate) minimax-Bayes solutions for various reinforcement learning problems to gain insights into the properties of the corresponding priors and policies. We find that while the worst-case prior depends on the setting, the corresponding minimax policies are more robust than those that assume a standard (i.e. uniform) prior.
LGOct 26, 2022
Environment Design for Inverse Reinforcement LearningThomas Kleine Buening, Victor Villin, Christos Dimitrakakis
Learning a reward function from demonstrations suffers from low sample-efficiency. Even with abundant data, current inverse reinforcement learning methods that focus on learning from a single environment can fail to handle slight changes in the environment dynamics. We tackle these challenges through adaptive environment design. In our framework, the learner repeatedly interacts with the expert, with the former selecting environments to identify the reward function as quickly as possible from the expert's demonstrations in said environments. This results in improvements in both sample-efficiency and robustness, as we show experimentally, for both exact and approximate inference.
LGOct 25, 2022
ANACONDA: An Improved Dynamic Regret Algorithm for Adaptive Non-Stationary Dueling BanditsThomas Kleine Buening, Aadirupa Saha
We study the problem of non-stationary dueling bandits and provide the first adaptive dynamic regret algorithm for this problem. The only two existing attempts in this line of work fall short across multiple dimensions, including pessimistic measures of non-stationary complexity and non-adaptive parameter tuning that requires knowledge of the number of preference changes. We develop an elimination-based rescheduling algorithm to overcome these shortcomings and show a near-optimal $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{S^{\texttt{CW}} T})$ dynamic regret bound, where $S^{\texttt{CW}}$ is the number of times the Condorcet winner changes in $T$ rounds. This yields the first near-optimal dynamic regret algorithm for unknown $S^{\texttt{CW}}$. We further study other related notions of non-stationarity for which we also prove near-optimal dynamic regret guarantees under additional assumptions on the underlying preference model.
LGNov 27, 2023
Bandits Meet Mechanism Design to Combat Clickbait in Online RecommendationThomas Kleine Buening, Aadirupa Saha, Christos Dimitrakakis et al.
We study a strategic variant of the multi-armed bandit problem, which we coin the strategic click-bandit. This model is motivated by applications in online recommendation where the choice of recommended items depends on both the click-through rates and the post-click rewards. Like in classical bandits, rewards follow a fixed unknown distribution. However, we assume that the click-rate of each arm is chosen strategically by the arm (e.g., a host on Airbnb) in order to maximize the number of times it gets clicked. The algorithm designer does not know the post-click rewards nor the arms' actions (i.e., strategically chosen click-rates) in advance, and must learn both values over time. To solve this problem, we design an incentive-aware learning algorithm, UCB-S, which achieves two goals simultaneously: (a) incentivizing desirable arm behavior under uncertainty; (b) minimizing regret by learning unknown parameters. We characterize all approximate Nash equilibria among arms under UCB-S and show a $\tilde{\mathcal{O}} (\sqrt{KT})$ regret bound uniformly in every equilibrium. We also show that incentive-unaware algorithms generally fail to achieve low regret in the strategic click-bandit. Finally, we support our theoretical results by simulations of strategic arm behavior which confirm the effectiveness and robustness of our proposed incentive design.
LGFeb 16
MAVRL: Learning Reward Functions from Multiple Feedback Types with Amortized Variational InferenceRaphaël Baur, Yannick Metz, Maria Gkoulta et al.
Reward learning typically relies on a single feedback type or combines multiple feedback types using manually weighted loss terms. Currently, it remains unclear how to jointly learn reward functions from heterogeneous feedback types such as demonstrations, comparisons, ratings, and stops that provide qualitatively different signals. We address this challenge by formulating reward learning from multiple feedback types as Bayesian inference over a shared latent reward function, where each feedback type contributes information through an explicit likelihood. We introduce a scalable amortized variational inference approach that learns a shared reward encoder and feedback-specific likelihood decoders and is trained by optimizing a single evidence lower bound. Our approach avoids reducing feedback to a common intermediate representation and eliminates the need for manual loss balancing. Across discrete and continuous-control benchmarks, we show that jointly inferred reward posteriors outperform single-type baselines, exploit complementary information across feedback types, and yield policies that are more robust to environment perturbations. The inferred reward uncertainty further provides interpretable signals for analyzing model confidence and consistency across feedback types.
LGDec 18, 2025
Stackelberg Learning from Human Feedback: Preference Optimization as a Sequential GameBarna Pásztor, Thomas Kleine Buening, Andreas Krause
We introduce Stackelberg Learning from Human Feedback (SLHF), a new framework for preference optimization. SLHF frames the alignment problem as a sequential-move game between two policies: a Leader, which commits to an action, and a Follower, which responds conditionally on the Leader's action. This approach decomposes preference optimization into a refinement problem for the Follower and an optimization problem against an adversary for the Leader. Unlike Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), which assigns scalar rewards to actions, or Nash Learning from Human Feedback (NLHF), which seeks a simultaneous-move equilibrium, SLHF leverages the asymmetry of sequential play to capture richer preference structures. The sequential design of SLHF naturally enables inference-time refinement, as the Follower learns to improve the Leader's actions, and these refinements can be leveraged through iterative sampling. We compare the solution concepts of SLHF, RLHF, and NLHF, and lay out key advantages in consistency, data sensitivity, and robustness to intransitive preferences. Experiments on large language models demonstrate that SLHF achieves strong alignment across diverse preference datasets, scales from 0.5B to 8B parameters, and yields inference-time refinements that transfer across model families without further fine-tuning.
CLFeb 18
Aligning Language Models from User InteractionsThomas Kleine Buening, Jonas Hübotter, Barna Pásztor et al.
Multi-turn user interactions are among the most abundant data produced by language models, yet we lack effective methods to learn from them. While typically discarded, these interactions often contain useful information: follow-up user messages may indicate that a response was incorrect, failed to follow an instruction, or did not align with the user's preferences. Importantly, language models are already able to make use of this information in context. After observing a user's follow-up, the same model is often able to revise its behavior. We leverage this ability to propose a principled and scalable method for learning directly from user interactions through self-distillation. By conditioning the model on the user's follow-up message and comparing the resulting token distribution with the original policy, we obtain a target for updating the policy that captures how the model's behavior changes in hindsight. We then distill this hindsight distribution back into the current policy. Remarkably, we show that training on real-world user conversations from WildChat improves language models across standard alignment and instruction-following benchmarks, without regressing other capabilities. The same mechanism enables personalization, allowing models to continually adapt to individual users through interaction without explicit feedback. Our results demonstrate that raw user interactions that arise naturally during deployment enable alignment, personalization, and continual adaptation.
LGMar 12, 2025
Strategyproof Reinforcement Learning from Human FeedbackThomas Kleine Buening, Jiarui Gan, Debmalya Mandal et al.
We study Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) in settings where multiple labelers may strategically misreport feedback to steer the learned policy toward their own preferences. We show that existing RLHF algorithms, including recent pluralistic methods, are not strategyproof, and that even a single strategic labeler can cause arbitrarily large misalignment with social welfare. Moreover, we prove that, in the worst case, any strategyproof RLHF algorithm must perform $k$-times worse than the optimal policy, where $k$ is the number of labelers. This suggests a fundamental trade-off between incentive alignment (ensuring labelers report truthfully) and policy alignment (maximizing social welfare). To address this, we propose the Pessimistic Median of MLEs algorithm, which, under appropriate policy coverage assumptions, is approximately strategyproof and converges to the optimal policy as the number of labelers and samples increases. Our results apply to both contextual bandits and Markov decision processes.
AIFeb 4, 2025
A Minimax Approach to Ad Hoc TeamworkVictor Villin, Thomas Kleine Buening, Christos Dimitrakakis
We propose a minimax-Bayes approach to Ad Hoc Teamwork (AHT) that optimizes policies against an adversarial prior over partners, explicitly accounting for uncertainty about partners at time of deployment. Unlike existing methods that assume a specific distribution over partners, our approach improves worst-case performance guarantees. Extensive experiments, including evaluations on coordinated cooking tasks from the Melting Pot suite, show our method's superior robustness compared to self-play, fictitious play, and best response learning. Our work highlights the importance of selecting an appropriate training distribution over teammates to achieve robustness in AHT.
LGFeb 11, 2025
A Unifying Framework for Causal Imitation Learning with Hidden ConfoundersDaqian Shao, Thomas Kleine Buening, Marta Kwiatkowska
We propose a general and unifying framework for causal Imitation Learning (IL) with hidden confounders that subsumes several existing confounded IL settings from the literature. Our framework accounts for two types of hidden confounders: (a) those observed by the expert, which thus influence the expert's policy, and (b) confounding noise hidden to both the expert and the IL algorithm. For additional flexibility, we also introduce a confounding noise horizon and time-varying expert-observable hidden variables. We show that causal IL in our framework can be reduced to a set of Conditional Moment Restrictions (CMRs) by leveraging trajectory histories as instruments to learn a history-dependent policy. We propose DML-IL, a novel algorithm that uses instrumental variable regression to solve these CMRs and learn a policy. We provide a bound on the imitation gap for DML-IL, which recovers prior results as special cases. Empirical evaluation on a toy environment with continues state-action spaces and multiple Mujoco tasks demonstrate that DML-IL outperforms state-of-the-art causal IL algorithms.
LGJun 1, 2024
Strategic Linear Contextual BanditsThomas Kleine Buening, Aadirupa Saha, Christos Dimitrakakis et al.
Motivated by the phenomenon of strategic agents gaming a recommender system to maximize the number of times they are recommended to users, we study a strategic variant of the linear contextual bandit problem, where the arms can strategically misreport privately observed contexts to the learner. We treat the algorithm design problem as one of mechanism design under uncertainty and propose the Optimistic Grim Trigger Mechanism (OptGTM) that incentivizes the agents (i.e., arms) to report their contexts truthfully while simultaneously minimizing regret. We also show that failing to account for the strategic nature of the agents results in linear regret. However, a trade-off between mechanism design and regret minimization appears to be unavoidable. More broadly, this work aims to provide insight into the intersection of online learning and mechanism design.
LGNov 8, 2021
Interactive Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Cooperative GamesThomas Kleine Buening, Anne-Marie George, Christos Dimitrakakis
We study the problem of designing autonomous agents that can learn to cooperate effectively with a potentially suboptimal partner while having no access to the joint reward function. This problem is modeled as a cooperative episodic two-agent Markov decision process. We assume control over only the first of the two agents in a Stackelberg formulation of the game, where the second agent is acting so as to maximise expected utility given the first agent's policy. How should the first agent act in order to learn the joint reward function as quickly as possible and so that the joint policy is as close to optimal as possible? We analyse how knowledge about the reward function can be gained in this interactive two-agent scenario. We show that when the learning agent's policies have a significant effect on the transition function, the reward function can be learned efficiently.
AIFeb 23, 2021
On Meritocracy in Optimal Set SelectionThomas Kleine Buening, Meirav Segal, Debabrota Basu et al.
Typically, merit is defined with respect to some intrinsic measure of worth. We instead consider a setting where an individual's worth is \emph{relative}: when a Decision Maker (DM) selects a set of individuals from a population to maximise expected utility, it is natural to consider the \emph{Expected Marginal Contribution} (EMC) of each person to the utility. We show that this notion satisfies an axiomatic definition of fairness for this setting. We also show that for certain policy structures, this notion of fairness is aligned with maximising expected utility, while for linear utility functions it is identical to the Shapley value. However, for certain natural policies, such as those that select individuals with a specific set of attributes (e.g. high enough test scores for college admissions), there is a trade-off between meritocracy and utility maximisation. We analyse the effect of constraints on the policy on both utility and fairness in extensive experiments based on college admissions and outcomes in Norwegian universities.