Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
- Stars
- 0
- Last push
- Apr 2, 2026 (53d ago)
Risk flags
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
James Wedgwood, Aashiq Muhamed, Mona T. Diab, Virginia Smith
No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
Preference alignment is usually achieved by weight-updating training on preference data, which adds substantial alignment-stage compute and provides limited mechanistic visibility. We propose Dynamic SAE Steering for Preference Alignment (DSPA), an inference-time method that makes sparse autoencoder (SAE) steering prompt-conditional. From preference triples, DSPA computes a conditional-difference map linking prompt f ...
eatures to generation-control features; during decoding, it modifies only token-active latents, without base-model weight updates. Across Gemma-2-2B/9B and Qwen3-8B, DSPA improves MT-Bench and is competitive on AlpacaEval while preserving multiple-choice accuracy. Under restricted preference data, DSPA remains robust and can rival the two-stage RAHF-SCIT pipeline while requiring up to $4.47\times$ fewer alignment-stage FLOPs. Finally, we audit the SAE features DSPA modifies, finding that preference directions are dominated by discourse and stylistic signals, and provide theory clarifying the conditional-difference map estimate and when top-$k$ ablation is principled.
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dynamic Sae Steering Data-efficient Preference Alignment | ARC | Accuracy | 25 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
| Dynamic Sae Steering Data-efficient Preference Alignment | TruthfulQA | Accuracy | 0 | paper-derived | No explicit refs |
Preference alignment is usually achieved by weight-updating training on preference data, which adds substantial alignment-stage compute and provides limited mechanistic visibility.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Models
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tasks
Generation, Dynamic Sae Steering Data-efficient Preference Alignment
Methods
None detected
Domains
None detected
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.