  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has become a crucial
technology for aligning language models with human values and intentions,
enabling models to produce more helpful and harmless responses. Reward models
are trained as proxies for human preferences to drive reinforcement learning
optimization. While reward models are often considered central to achieving
high performance, they face the following challenges in practical applications:
(1) Incorrect and ambiguous preference pairs in the dataset may hinder the
reward model from accurately capturing human intent. (2) Reward models trained
on data from a specific distribution often struggle to generalize to examples
outside that distribution and are not suitable for iterative RLHF training.
  In this report, we attempt to address these two issues. (1) From a data
perspective, we propose a method to measure the strength of preferences within
the data, based on a voting mechanism of multiple reward models. Experimental
results confirm that data with varying preference strengths have different
impacts on reward model performance. We introduce a series of novel methods to
mitigate the influence of incorrect and ambiguous preferences in the dataset
and fully leverage high-quality preference data. (2) From an algorithmic
standpoint, we introduce contrastive learning to enhance the ability of reward
models to distinguish between chosen and rejected responses, thereby improving
model generalization. Furthermore, we employ meta-learning to enable the reward
model to maintain the ability to differentiate subtle differences in
out-of-distribution samples, and this approach can be utilized for iterative
RLHF optimization.
