User Modeling

Humans shift between different personas depending on social context. Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate a similar flexibility in adopting different personas and behaviors. Existing approaches, however, typically adapt such behavior through external knowledge such as prompting, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), or fine-tuning. We ask: do LLMs really need external context or parameters to adapt to different behaviors, or do they already have such knowledge embedded in their parameters? In this work, we show that LLMs already contain persona-specialized subnetworks in their parameter space. Using small calibration datasets, we identify distinct activation signatures associated with different personas. Guided by these statistics, we develop a masking strategy that isolates lightweight persona subnetworks. Building on the findings, we further discuss: how can we discover opposing subnetworks from the model that lead to binary-opposing personas, such as introvert-extrovert? To further enhance separation in binary opposition scenarios, we introduce a contrastive pruning strategy that identifies parameters responsible for the statistical divergence between opposing personas. Our method is entirely training-free and relies solely on the language model's existing parameter space. Across diverse evaluation settings, the resulting subnetworks exhibit significantly stronger persona alignment than baselines that require external knowledge while being more efficient. Our findings suggest that diverse human-like behaviors are not merely induced in LLMs, but are already embedded in their parameter space—pointing toward a new perspective on controllable and interpretable personalization in large language models. Our code is available at https://github.com/Ruimeng-Ye/Persona.git.

Recent AI trends seek to align AI models to learned human-centric objectives, such as personal preferences, utility, or societal values. Using standard preference elicitation methods, researchers and practitioners build models of human decisions and judgments, to which AI models are aligned. However, standard elicitation methods often fail to capture the true cognitive processes behind human decision making, such as the use of heuristics or simplifying structured thought patterns. To address this limitation, we take an axiomatic approach to learning cognitively faithful decision processes from pairwise comparisons. Building on the vast literature characterizing cognitive processes that contribute to human decision-making and pairwise comparisons, we derive a class of models in which individual features are first processed with learned rules, then aggregated via a fixed rule, such as the Bradley-Terry rule, to produce a decision. This structured processing of information ensures that such models are realistic and feasible candidates to represent underlying human decision-making processes. We demonstrate the efficacy of this modeling approach by learning interpretable models of human decision making in a kidney allocation task, and show that our proposed models match or surpass the accuracy of prior models of human pairwise decision-making.

Conversations with LMs involve two participants: a human user leading the conversation, and an LM assistant responding to the user's request. To satisfy this specific role, LMs are post-trained to be helpful assistants - optimized to produce exhaustive and well-structured responses, often free of ambiguity. User utterances, on the other hand, are rarely perfected, with each user phrasing requests in unique and indirect ways, making the least effort at each turn and refining on the fly. To better understand LM performance in a realistic setting, prior work has proposed to simulate users in multi-turn conversations, often prompting an assistant model to play the role of the user. However, we show in this work that assistant LMs make for poor user simulators, with surprising evidence that better assistants yield worse simulators. Instead, we introduce purpose-built User Language Models (User LMs) - models post-trained to simulate human users in multi-turn conversations. Through various evaluations, we show how User LMs align better with human behavior and achieve better simulation robustness than existing simulation methods. When leveraging User LMs to simulate coding and math conversations, the performance of a strong assistant (GPT-4o) drops from 74.6% to 57.4%, confirming that more realistic simulation environments lead to assistant struggles as they fail to cope with the nuances of users in multi-turn setups.

Personalizing large language models (LLMs) is increasingly important as they are progressively integrated into real-world applications to support users’ daily lives. However, existing approaches often fail to distinguish which components of response predictions by model and ground-truth response in training data truly reflect user preferences, resulting in shallow personalization alignment. In this paper, we introduce NextQuill, a novel LLM personalization alignment framework grounded in causal preference modeling. We approach personalization from a causal perspective, recognizing that model-predicted responses (model side) and user-written ground-truth responses (data side) are both outcomes shape by user history (characteristics) and other context factors. To better capture user preferences, we define causal preference effects as the causal effect of the user history/characteristics on outcomes from the model/data side. Building on this foundation, NextQuill introduces two complementary alignment strategies: (1) aligning model-side causal preference effects (on predictions) with those of ground-truth data, rather than indiscriminately aligning all predictions, and (2) emphasizing learning the preference-driven ground-truth tokens, identified via data-side causal preference effects, rather than treating all tokens equally. As such, NextQuill shifts the alignment process toward learning from causal preference effects, facilitating more effective and personalized LLM adaptation. Experiments on multiple personalization benchmarks demonstrate that NextQuill substantially improves personalization quality. Code is available at \url{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/NextQuill-1E4E}.

Preference‑based reward learning is widely used for shaping agent behavior to match a user's preference, yet its sparse binary feedback makes it especially vulnerable to causal confusion. The learned reward often latches onto spurious features that merely co‑occur with preferred trajectories during training, collapsing when those correlations disappear or reverse at test time. We introduce ReCouPLe, a lightweight framework that uses natural language rationales to provide the missing causal signal. Each rationale is treated as a guiding projection axis in embedding space, training the model to score trajectories based on features aligned with that axis while de-emphasizing context that is unrelated to the stated reason. Because identical rationales can arise across multiple tasks (e.g., "_it avoids collisions with a fragile object_"), ReCouPLe naturally reuses the same causal direction whenever tasks share semantics, and transfers preference knowledge to novel tasks without extra data or language‑model fine‑tuning. Our learned reward model can ground preferences on the articulated reason, aligning better with user intent and generalizing beyond spurious features.

Safe and feasible trajectory planning is critical for real-world autonomous driving systems. However, existing learning-based planners rely heavily on expert demonstrations, which not only lack explicit safety awareness but also risk inheriting undesirable behaviors such as speeding from suboptimal human driving data. Inspired by the success of large language models, we propose Plan-R1, a two-stage trajectory planning framework that decouples principle alignment from behavior learning. In the first stage, a general trajectory predictor is pre-trained on expert data to capture diverse, human-like driving behaviors. In the second stage, the model is fine-tuned with rule-based rewards using Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), explicitly aligning ego planning with principles such as safety, comfort, and traffic rule compliance. This two-stage paradigm retains human-like behaviors while enhancing safety awareness and discarding undesirable patterns from demonstrations. Furthermore, we identify a key limitation of directly applying GRPO to planning: group-wise normalization erases cross-group scale differences, causing rare, high-variance safety-violation groups to have similar advantages as abundant low-variance safe groups, thereby suppressing optimization for safety-critical objectives. To address this, we propose Variance-Decoupled GRPO (VD-GRPO), which replaces normalization with centering and fixed scaling to preserve absolute reward magnitudes, ensuring that safety-critical objectives remain dominant throughout training. Experiments on the nuPlan benchmark demonstrate that Plan-R1 significantly improves planning safety and feasibility, achieving state-of-the-art performance, particularly in realistic reactive settings.

Preference data is widely used for aligning language models, but remains largely opaque. While prior work has studied specific aspects of annotator preference (e.g., length or sycophancy), automatically inferring preferences without pre-specifying hypotheses remains challenging. We introduce *What's In My Human Feedback* (WIMHF), a method that produces human-interpretable, natural language features from preference data using sparse autoencoders. We show that a sparse set of interpretable features can account for two-thirds of the preference signal achieved by black-box models. Applying WIMHF to 7 widely-used datasets, we precisely characterize both (1) which preferences are even possible to measure from each dataset and (2) which preferences humans actually display. WIMHF surfaces preferences that are unintentional or even actively harmful, like a preference for toxic outputs in Chatbot Arena. We show how these findings enable *interpretable data curation*: re-labeling the examples that contain the harmful preference yields large safety gains (+37%) with no cost to general performance. We also demonstrate a new approach to *personalization*: on the Community Alignment dataset, we identify preferences that are subjective across annotators, and use the features as interpretable knobs to adjust model behavior along these axes.

Real-world large language model deployments (e.g., conversational AI systems, code generation assistants) naturally generate abundant implicit user dissatisfaction (DSAT) signals, as users iterate toward better answers through refinements, corrections, and expressed preferences, while explicit satisfaction (SAT) feedback is scarce. Existing preference learning approaches are poorly aligned with this data profile, as they rely on costly human annotations or assume plentiful positive responses. In this paper, we introduce \textbf{DRIFT} (\textbf{D}issatisfaction-\textbf{R}efined \textbf{I}terative pre\textbf{F}erence \textbf{T}raining), which anchors training on real-world DSAT signals and samples positives dynamically from the evolving policy. Empirically, DRIFT models trained on real-world \textit{WildFeedback} datasets and synthetic \textit{UltraFeedback} datasets achieve up to +6.23\% (7B) / +7.61\% (14B) on WildBench Task Score and up to +8.95\% (7B) / +12.29\% (14B) on AlpacaEval2 win rate over base models, outperforming strong baseline methods such as iterative DPO and SPIN. At larger scales, the improvements are particularly pronounced: 14B models trained with DRIFT surpass GPT-4o-mini on WildBench. Further analysis shows that DRIFT also preserves exploratory capacity, yielding more diverse high-reward solutions rather than collapsing to narrow subsets. Theoretically, we demonstrate that this design preserves preference margins and avoids the gradient degeneration. These results show that DRIFT is an effective and scalable recipe for real-world post-training that leverages the most abundant and informative signal.

Humans often juggle multiple, sometimes conflicting objectives and shift their priorities as circumstances change, rather than following a fixed objective function. In contrast, most computational decision-making and multi-objective RL methods assume static preference weights or a known scalar reward. In this work, we study sequential decision-making problem when these preference weights are unobserved latent variables that drift with context. Specifically, we propose Dynamic Preference Inference (DPI), a cognitively inspired framework in which an agent maintains a probabilistic belief over preference weights, updates this belief from recent interaction, and conditions its policy on inferred preferences. We instantiate DPI as a variational preference inference module trained jointly with a preference-conditioned actor–critic, using vector-valued returns as evidence about latent trade-offs. In queueing, gridworld maze, and multi-objective continuous-control environments with event-driven changes in objectives, DPI adapts its inferred preferences to new regimes and achieves higher post-shift performance than fixed-weight and heuristic envelope baselines.

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is a widely used approach to align large-scale AI systems with human values. However, RLHF typically assumes a single, universal reward, which overlooks diverse preferences and limits personalization. Variational Preference Learning (VPL) seeks to address this by introducing user-specific latent variables. Despite its promise, we found that VPL suffers from posterior collapse. While this phenomenon is well known in VAEs, it has not previously been identified in preference learning frameworks. Under sparse preference data and with overly expressive decoders, VPL may cause latent variables to be ignored, reverting to a single-reward model. To overcome this limitation, we propose Swap-guided Preference Learning (SPL). The key idea is to construct fictitious swap annotators and use the mirroring property of their preferences to guide the encoder. SPL introduces three components: (1) swap-guided base regularization, (2) Preferential Inverse Autoregressive Flow (P-IAF), and (3) adaptive latent conditioning. Experiments show that SPL mitigates collapse, enriches user-specific latents, and improves preference prediction. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/cobang0111/SPL

Reward modeling is crucial for aligning large language models with human preferences, yet current approaches lack a principled mathematical framework for leveraging ordinal preference data. When human annotators provide graded preferences on a Likert scale (e.g., significantly better, better, slightly better, negligibly better), existing methods typically apply ad-hoc heuristics, such as margin terms or scaling factors, to loss functions derived from binary preference models like Bradley-Terry. These approaches lack an underlying mathematical model for how ordinal preference data is generated. We present a theoretically grounded framework that formulates reward modeling with Likert scale preferences as a discrete ordinal regression problem. We derive two loss functions from this formulation: a negative log-likelihood loss and an all-threshold loss, both of which learn threshold parameters that naturally capture the ordinal structure of preferences. Unlike existing heuristic methods that manually specify fixed margins or scaling weights, our approach learns these parameters directly from data within a coherent probabilistic framework. Experimental results on multiple benchmarks demonstrate that our ordinal regression approach consistently achieves competitive or superior performance compared to existing heuristic methods across diverse evaluation categories including chat, reasoning, and safety tasks. Our work provides the first principled mathematical framework for incorporating Likert scale preferences into reward model training, moving beyond ad-hoc modifications of binary preference models to enable more effective utilization of fine-grained human feedback.

Adversarial scenario generation is a cost-effective approach for safety assessment of autonomous driving systems. However, existing methods are often constrained to a single, fixed trade-off between competing objectives such as adversariality and realism. This yields behavior-specific models that cannot be steered at inference time, lacking the efficiency and flexibility to generate tailored scenarios for diverse training and testing requirements. In view of this, we reframe the task of adversarial scenario generation as a multi-objective preference alignment problem and introduce a new framework named Steerable Adversarial scenario GEnerator (SAGE). SAGE enables fine-grained test-time control over the trade-off between adversariality and realism without any retraining. We first propose hierarchical group-based preference optimization, a data-efficient offline alignment method that learns to balance competing objectives by decoupling hard feasibility constraints from soft preferences. Instead of training a fixed model, SAGE fine-tunes two experts on opposing preferences and constructs a continuous spectrum of policies at inference time by linearly interpolating their weights. We provide theoretical justification for this framework through the lens of linear mode connectivity. Extensive experiments demonstrate that SAGE not only generates scenarios with a superior balance of adversariality and realism but also enables more effective closed-loop training of driving policies. Project page: https://tongnie.github.io/SAGE/.

Aligning large language models with human preferences is critical for creating reliable and controllable AI systems. A human preference can be visualized as a high-dimensional vector where different directions represent trade-offs between desired attributes (e.g., helpfulness vs. verbosity). Yet, because the training data often reflects dominant, average preferences, LLMs tend to perform well on com- mon requests but falls short in specific, individual needs. This mismatch creates a preference coverage gap. Existing methods often address this through costly retraining, which may not be generalized to the full spectrum of diverse preferences. This brittleness means that when a user’s request reflects a nuanced preference deviating from the training data’s central tendency, model performance can degrade unpredictably. To address this challenge, we introduce Robust Preference Selection (RPS), a post-hoc, training-free method by leveraging directional neighborhood consensus. Instead of forcing a model to generate a response from a single, highly specific preference, RPS samples multiple responses from a local neighborhood of related preferences to create a superior candidate pool. It then selects the re- sponse that best aligns with the user’s original intent. We provide a theoretical framework showing that, under mild conditions where (i) nearby preference direc- tions correspond to better-trained regions of the model and (ii) the reward-model scores change smoothly with small angular changes in the preference vector, our neighborhood generation strategy yields a higher expected best score than a strong baseline that also samples multiple candidates. Comprehensive experiments across three distinct alignment paradigms (DPA, DPO, and SFT) demonstrate that RPS consistently improves robustness against this baseline, achieving win rates of up to 69% on challenging preferences from under-represented regions of the space without any model retraining. Our work presents a practical, theoretically-grounded solution for enhancing the reliability of preference-aligned models.

Click-through rate (CTR) prediction is crucial for recommendation systems and online advertising, relying heavily on effective user behavior modeling. While existing methods separately refine long-term and short-term interest representations, the fusion of these behaviors remains a critical yet understudied challenge due to misaligned feature spaces, disjointed modeling, and noise propagation in short-term interests. To address these limitations, we propose iFusion, a diffusion-based generative user interest fusion method, which reformulates interest fusion as a conditional generation process. iFusion leverages short-term interests as conditional guidance and progressively integrates long-term representations through denoising, eliminating reliance on linear fusion assumptions. Our framework introduces two key components: (1) the Disentangled Classifier-Free Diffusion Guidance (DCFG) Mechanism, which adaptively disentangles core preferences from transient fluctuations, and (2) the Mixture AutoRegressive Denoising Network (MARN), which enables joint interest modeling and fusion through autoregressive denoising. Experiments demonstrate that iFusion outperforms baselines across public and industrial datasets, as well as in online A/B tests, validating its effectiveness in robust CTR prediction. This work establishes a new paradigm for generative user interests fusion in CTR prediction.

Despite the impressive performance of LLM-powered agents, their adoption for Electronic Health Record (EHR) data access remains limited by the absence of benchmarks that adequately capture real-world clinical data access flows. In practice, two core challenges hinder deployment: query ambiguity from vague user questions and value mismatch between user terminology and database entries. To address this, we introduce EHR-ChatQA an interactive database question answering benchmark that evaluates the end-to-end workflow of database agents: clarifying user questions, using tools to resolve value mismatches, and generating correct SQL to deliver accurate answers. To cover diverse patterns of query ambiguity and value mismatch, EHR-ChatQA assesses agents in a simulated environment with an LLM-based user across two interaction flows: Incremental Query Refinement (IncreQA), where users add constraints to existing queries, and Adaptive Query Refinement (AdaptQA), where users adjust their search goals mid-conversation. Experiments with state-of-the-art LLMs (e.g., o4-mini and Gemini-2.5-Flash) over five i.i.d. trials show that while agents achieve high Pass@5 of 90-95% (at least one of five trials) on IncreQA and 60-80% on AdaptQA, their Pass^5 (consistent success across all five trials) is substantially lower by 35-60%. These results underscore the need to build agents that are not only performant but also robust for the safety-critical EHR domain. Finally, we provide diagnostic insights into common failure modes to guide future agent development.

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has achieved considerable success in aligning large language models (LLMs) by modeling human preferences with a learnable reward model and employing a reinforcement learning algorithm to maximize the reward model's scores. However, these reward models are susceptible to exploitation through various superficial confounding factors, with length bias emerging as a particularly significant concern. Moreover, while the pronounced impact of length bias on preference modeling suggests that LLMs possess an inherent sensitivity to length perception, our preliminary investigations reveal that fine-tuned LLMs consistently struggle to adhere to explicit length instructions. To address these two limitations, we propose a novel framework wherein the reward model explicitly differentiates between human semantic preferences and response length requirements. Specifically, we introduce a $\textbf{R}$esponse-$\textbf{c}$onditioned $\textbf{B}$radley-$\textbf{T}$erry (Rc-BT) model that enhances the model's capability in length bias mitigating and length instruction following, through training on our augmented dataset. Furthermore, we propose the Rc-RM and Rc-DPO algorithm to leverage the Rc-BT model for reward modeling and direct policy optimization (DPO) of LLMs, simultaneously mitigating length bias and promoting adherence to length instructions. Extensive experiments across various models and datasets demonstrate the effectiveness and generalizability of our approach.

Guardian models play a crucial role in ensuring the safety and ethical behavior of user-facing AI applications by enforcing guardrails and detecting harmful content. While standard guardian models are limited to predefined, static harm categories, we introduce DynaGuard, a suite of dynamic guardian models offering novel flexibility by evaluating text based on user-defined policies, and DynaBench, a dataset for training and evaluating dynamic guardian models. Our models provide both rapid detection of policy violations and a chain-of-thought reasoning option that articulate and justify model outputs. Critically, DynaGuard not only surpasses static models in detection accuracy on traditional safety categories, but is competitive with frontier reasoning models on free-form policy violations, all in a fraction of the time. This breakthrough makes DynaGuard a critical tool for language model guardrails.

Alignment of large language models (LLMs) has predominantly relied on pairwise preference optimization, where annotators select the better of two responses to a prompt. While simple, this approach overlooks the opportunity to learn from richer forms of human feedback, such as multiwise comparisons and top-$k$ rankings. We introduce $\textit{Ranked Choice Preference Optimization}$ (RCPO), a unified framework that bridges preference optimization with (ranked) choice modeling via maximum likelihood estimation. RCPO supports both utility based and rank based models, subsumes several pairwise methods (such as DPO and SimPO) as special cases, and provide principled training objectives for richer feedback formats. We instantiate this framework with two representative models (Multinomial Logit and Mallows-RMJ). Experiments on Llama-3-8B-Instruct, Gemma-2-9B-it, and Mistral-7B-Instruct across in-distribution and out-of-distribution settings show that RCPO consistently outperforms competitive baselines. RCPO shows that directly leveraging ranked preference data, combined with the right choice models, yields more effective alignment. It offers an extensible foundation for incorporating (ranked) choice modeling into LLM training.

Transformer-based language models (LMs) notably struggle to reliably capture distant contextual information. This work introduces a novel approach using meta-tokens -- special tokens injected during pre-training -- paired with a dedicated meta-attention mechanism to guide LMs to use these tokens. We pre-train a language model equipped with meta-attention in addition to causal multi-head attention on <100B tokens, achieving strong performance on a suite of synthetic tasks. Our method facilitates length generalization up to 2$\times$ the context window after extension with YaRN. We provide an information-theoretic analysis which reveals that meta-tokens \textit{sharpen} the positional encoding, allowing them to operate as content-based anchors that compress preceding context and “cache” it within the meta-token. We empirically confirm this by visualizing model internals to study the residual stream. Together, our findings demonstrate that meta-tokens and meta-attention provide a simple, data-efficient pre-training method, grounded by new mechanistic insights into their role in enabling length generalization behavior.

Inspired by behavioral science, we propose Behavior Learning (BL), a novel general-purpose machine learning framework that learns interpretable and identifiable optimization structures from data, ranging from single optimization problems to hierarchical compositions. It unifies predictive performance, intrinsic interpretability, and identifiability, with broad applicability to scientific domains involving optimization. BL parameterizes a compositional utility function built from intrinsically interpretable modular blocks, which induces a data distribution for prediction and generation. Each block represents and can be written in symbolic form as a utility maximization problem (UMP), a foundational paradigm in behavioral science and a universal framework of optimization. BL supports architectures ranging from a single UMP to hierarchical compositions, the latter modeling hierarchical optimization structures that offer both expressiveness and structural transparency. Its smooth and monotone variant (IBL) guarantees identifiability under mild conditions. Theoretically, we establish the universal approximation property of both BL and IBL, and analyze the M-estimation properties of IBL. Empirically, BL demonstrates strong predictive performance, intrinsic interpretability and scalability to high-dimensional data. Code: https://github.com/MoonYLiang/Behavior-Learning; installable via pip install blnetwork.