Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Offline RL by Reward-Weighted Fine-Tuning for Conversation Optimization

Subhojyoti Mukherjee, Viet Dac Lai, Raghavendra Addanki, Ryan Rossi, Seunghyun Yoon, Trung Bui, Anup Rao, Jayakumar Subramanian, Branislav Kveton · Jun 8, 2025 · Citations: 0

Abstract

Offline reinforcement learning (RL) is a variant of RL where the policy is learned from a previously collected dataset of trajectories and rewards. In our work, we propose a practical approach to offline RL with large language models (LLMs). We recast the problem as reward-weighted fine-tuning, which can be solved using similar techniques to supervised fine-tuning (SFT). To showcase the value of our approach, we apply it to learning short-horizon question-answering policies of a fixed length, where the agent reasons about potential answers or asks clarifying questions. Our work stands in a stark contrast to state-of-the-art methods in this domain, based on SFT and direct preference optimization, which have additional hyper-parameters and do not directly optimize for rewards. We compare to them empirically, and report major gains in both optimized rewards and language quality.

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper has direct human-feedback and/or evaluation protocol signal and is likely useful for eval pipeline design.

Eval-Fit Score

40/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Detected

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

HFEPX Fit

High-confidence candidate

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: Yes
  • Feedback types: Pairwise Preference
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: General
  • Extraction source: Persisted extraction

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes:
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Confidence: 0.45
  • Flags: ambiguous

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Deterministic synthesis

In our work, we propose a practical approach to offline RL with large language models (LLMs). HFEPX signals include Pairwise Preference with confidence 0.45. Updated from current HFEPX corpus.

Generated Mar 5, 2026, 3:26 AM · Grounded in abstract + metadata only

Key Takeaways

  • In our work, we propose a practical approach to offline RL with large language models (LLMs).
  • To showcase the value of our approach, we apply it to learning short-horizon question-answering policies of a fixed length, where the agent reasons about potential answers or asks…

Researcher Actions

  • Compare its human-feedback setup against pairwise and rubric hubs.
  • Identify benchmark choices from full text before operationalizing conclusions.
  • Verify metric definitions before comparing against your eval pipeline.

Caveats

  • Generated from title, abstract, and extracted metadata only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
  • Extraction confidence is probabilistic and should be validated for critical decisions.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • In our work, we propose a practical approach to offline RL with large language models (LLMs).
  • To showcase the value of our approach, we apply it to learning short-horizon question-answering policies of a fixed length, where the agent reasons about potential answers or asks clarifying questions.
  • Our work stands in a stark contrast to state-of-the-art methods in this domain, based on SFT and direct preference optimization, which have additional hyper-parameters and do not directly optimize for rewards.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • To showcase the value of our approach, we apply it to learning short-horizon question-answering policies of a fixed length, where the agent reasons about potential answers or asks clarifying questions.
  • Our work stands in a stark contrast to state-of-the-art methods in this domain, based on SFT and direct preference optimization, which have additional hyper-parameters and do not directly optimize for rewards.

Researcher Checklist

  • Pass: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Pairwise Preference

  • Gap: Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.