A Markov Chain Approach to Preference Alignment

We propose Markov Chain from Human Feedback (MCHF), an elementary approach for aligning generative models from pairwise human preferences. Unlike Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), which reduces comparisons to a scalar reward, and Nash Learning from Human Feedback (NLHF), which preserves pairwise utilities through a KL-regularized minimax optimization, MCHF uses pairwise preferences directly to define a transition mechanism over model outputs. Given a pairwise utility $U(x,y)$, which quantifies human preference for $y$ over $x$, and a reference probability distribution $μ_{\mathsf{ref}}$, we define a Markov kernel $\mathsf{P}(x, dy)\propto \exp(U(x,y))μ_{\mathsf{ref}}(dy)$, and take the Markov chain starting from $μ_{\mathsf{ref}}$ as an iterative alignment procedure. We show that MCHF converges geometrically fast to the stationary distribution, with a convergence rate governed by the seminorm $\|U\|_\oplus=\inf_{g,f\in L^\infty(μ_{\mathsf{ref}})}\|U-g\oplus f\|_\infty$, which quantifies the non-transitive structure of the pairwise utility. We further show that a mirror-descent algorithm for NLHF satisfies an analogous structure-adaptive convergence guarantee. Finally, through a perturbation analysis, we prove that when $\|U\|_\oplus$ is small, MCHF and NLHF agree up to first order around an RLHF solution, which yields a unified view of reward-based, game-theoretic, and Markovian approaches to alignment. In particular, for two natural algorithms that converge to the MCHF/NLHF equilibria, we show that the first step of MCHF and NLHF recovers the RLHF solution based on the column-sum reward $\hat{f}(y)=\int μ_{\mathsf{ref}}(dx) U(x, y)$, and starting from the second iteration, both algorithms incorporate the same linear functional of the residual $U-(-\hat f)\oplus \hat f$, which captures the non-transitive structure of the pairwise utility $U$.

Denoising Diffusions with Optimal Transport: Localization, Curvature, and Multi-Scale Complexity

Adding noise is easy; what about denoising? Diffusion is easy; what about reverting a diffusion? Diffusion-based generative models aim to denoise a Langevin diffusion chain, moving from a log-concave equilibrium measure $\nu$, say isotropic Gaussian, back to a complex, possibly non-log-concave initial measure $\mu$. The score function performs denoising, going backward in time, predicting the conditional mean of the past location given the current. We show that score denoising is the optimal backward map in transportation cost. What is its localization uncertainty? We show that the curvature function determines this localization uncertainty, measured as the conditional variance of the past location given the current. We study in this paper the effectiveness of the diffuse-then-denoise process: the contraction of the forward diffusion chain, offset by the possible expansion of the backward denoising chain, governs the denoising difficulty. For any initial measure $\mu$, we prove that this offset net contraction at time $t$ is characterized by the curvature complexity of a smoothed $\mu$ at a specific signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) scale $r(t)$. We discover that the multi-scale curvature complexity collectively determines the difficulty of the denoising chain. Our multi-scale complexity quantifies a fine-grained notion of average-case curvature instead of the worst-case. Curiously, it depends on an integrated tail function, measuring the relative mass of locations with positive curvature versus those with negative curvature; denoising at a specific SNR scale is easy if such an integrated tail is light. We conclude with several non-log-concave examples to demonstrate how the multi-scale complexity probes the bottleneck SNR for the diffuse-then-denoise process.

Corrected generalized cross-validation for finite ensembles of penalized estimators

Generalized cross-validation (GCV) is a widely-used method for estimating the squared out-of-sample prediction risk that employs a scalar degrees of freedom adjustment (in a multiplicative sense) to the squared training error. In this paper, we examine the consistency of GCV for estimating the prediction risk of arbitrary ensembles of penalized least squares estimators. We show that GCV is inconsistent for any finite ensemble of size greater than one. Towards repairing this shortcoming, we identify a correction that involves an additional scalar correction (in an additive sense) based on degrees of freedom adjusted training errors from each ensemble component. The proposed estimator (termed CGCV) maintains the computational advantages of GCV and requires neither sample splitting, model refitting, or out-of-bag risk estimation. The estimator stems from a finer inspection of ensemble risk decomposition and two intermediate risk estimators for the components in this decomposition. We provide a non-asymptotic analysis of the CGCV and the two intermediate risk estimators for ensembles of convex penalized estimators under Gaussian features and a linear response model. In the special case of ridge regression, we extend the analysis to general feature and response distributions using random matrix theory, which establishes model-free uniform consistency of CGCV.