Skip to content
Back to skills

Grao Unified Alignment

ASecurity

Unifies supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning through GRAO framework that combines multiple-output generation with group direct alignment loss for improved preference learning.

  • 6 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 9, 2026
toolspythongitperformance

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 9, 2026

npx -y skills add ADu2021/skillXiv --skill grao-unified-alignment --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Grao Unified Alignment?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Grao Unified Alignment
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/adu2021-grao-unified-alignment/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/adu2021-grao-unified-alignment)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: grao-unified-alignment
title: Learning to Align Aligning to Learn - GRAO Unified Self-Optimized Alignment
version: 0.0.2
engine: skillxiv-v0.0.2-claude-opus-4.6
license: MIT
url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.07750
keywords: [model-alignment, sft-rl, preference-optimization, group-relative-rewards]
description: "Unifies supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning through GRAO framework that combines multiple-output generation with group direct alignment loss for improved preference learning."
---

## Learning to Align Aligning to Learn: GRAO Unified Self-Optimized Alignment

### Core Concept

GRAO (Group Relative Alignment Optimization) bridges the gap between SFT and RL-based alignment approaches. Rather than treating them as separate phases, GRAO generates multiple candidate outputs, compares them using reward feedback, and applies group-relative optimization to achieve superior alignment with human preferences compared to standard approaches.

### Architecture Overview

- **Multi-Sample Generation**: Create multiple outputs for comparative evaluation
- **Group Direct Alignment Loss**: Intra-group relative advantage weighting
- **Reference-Aware Updates**: Pairwise preference dynamics
- **Unified Alignment**: Single framework combining SFT and RL strengths

### Implementation Steps

**Step 1: Implement Multi-Sample Generation**

Generate candidate responses:

```python
class MultiSampleGenerator:
    def __init__(self, model, num_samples=4):
        super().__init__()
        self.model = model
        self.num_samples = num_samples

    def generate_candidates(self, prompt):
        """Generate multiple response candidates."""
        candidates = []

        for sample_idx in range(self.num_samples):
            with torch.no_grad():
                output = self.model.generate(
                    prompt,
                    max_length=256,
                    temperature=0.8 + 0.1 * sample_idx,  # Varied temperature
                    top_p=0.9,
                    do_sample=True
                )

            text = self.model.tokenizer.decode(output[0])
            candidates.append({
                'text': text,
                'tokens': output[0],
                'index': sample_idx
            })

        return candidates
```

**Step 2: Implement Group Direct Alignment Loss**

Design loss for preference learning:

```python
class GroupDirectAlignmentLoss(nn.Module):
    def __init__(self, reward_model):
        super().__init__()
        self.reward_model = reward_model

    def compute_loss(self, candidates, scores):
        """
        Compute GRAO loss with intra-group relative weighting.

        Args:
            candidates: List of candidate outputs
            scores: Reward scores for each candidate

        Returns:
            loss: GRAO loss value
        """
        # Rank candidates by score
        sorted_indices = torch.argsort(torch.tensor(scores), descending=True)

        total_loss = 0

        # Pairwise comparisons within group
        for i in range(len(candidates)):
            for j in range(i + 1, len(candidates)):
                idx_i = sorted_indices[i]
                idx_j = sorted_indices[j]

                # Candidate i should be better than j
                candidate_i = candidates[idx_i]
                candidate_j = candidates[idx_j]

                score_i = scores[idx_i]
                score_j = scores[idx_j]

                # Log probabilities
                logits_i = self._get_logits(candidate_i)
                logits_j = self._get_logits(candidate_j)

                log_prob_i = F.log_softmax(logits_i, dim=-1).mean()
                log_prob_j = F.log_softmax(logits_j, dim=-1).mean()

                # Relative advantage
                relative_advantage = (score_i - score_j) / (abs(score_i - score_j) + 1e-8)

                # Loss: improve i relative to j
                pairwise_loss = -log_prob_i * torch.relu(relative_advantage + 1.0)

                total_loss = total_loss + pairwise_loss

        return total_loss / (len(candidates) * (len(candidates) - 1) / 2)

    def _get_logits(self, candidate):
        """Get logits for candidate."""
        with torch.no_grad():
            outputs = self.model(candidate['tokens'])
        return outputs.logits
```

**Step 3: Compute Preference Scores**

Evaluate candidate quality:

```python
class PreferenceScorer:
    def __init__(self, reward_model):
        super().__init__()
        self.reward_model = reward_model

    def score_candidates(self, prompt, candidates):
        """
        Score candidates using reward model.

        Args:
            prompt: Original prompt
            candidates: List of candidate outputs

        Returns:
            scores: Reward scores for each candidate
        """
        scores = []

        for candidate in candidates:
            # Compute reward
            full_text = prompt + candidate['text']

            with torch.no_grad():
                reward = self.reward_model.score(full_text)

            scores.append(reward)

        return torch.tensor(scores)

    def compute_preference_pairs(self, candidates, scores):
        """
        Convert scores to preference pairs.

        Returns:
            pairs: List of (better, worse) candidate pairs
        """
        pairs = []

        sorted_indices = torch.argsort(scores, descending=True)

        for i in range(len(sorted_indices)):
            for j in range(i + 1, len(sorted_indices)):
                better_idx = sorted_indices[i]
                worse_idx = sorted_indices[j]

                pairs.append({
                    'better': candidates[better_idx],
                    'worse': candidates[worse_idx],
                    'score_diff': scores[better_idx] - scores[worse_idx]
                })

        return pairs
```

**Step 4: Implement GRAO Training Loop**

Full alignment training:

```python
class GRAOTrainer:
    def __init__(self, model, reward_model):
        super().__init__()
        self.model = model
        self.reward_model = reward_model
        self.generator = MultiSampleGenerator(model)
        self.scorer = PreferenceScorer(reward_model)
        self.loss_fn = GroupDirectAlignmentLoss(reward_model)

    def train_grao(self, training_data, num_epochs=3):
        """
        Train model using GRAO framework.

        Args:
            training_data: List of prompts and reference answers
            num_epochs: Training epochs

        Returns:
            training_stats: Statistics from training
        """
        optimizer = AdamW(self.model.parameters(), lr=1e-5)
        scheduler = CosineAnnealingLR(optimizer, T_max=num_epochs * len(training_data))

        for epoch in range(num_epochs):
            total_loss = 0

            for prompt, reference in training_data:
                # Generate multiple candidates
                candidates = self.generator.generate_candidates(prompt)

                # Score candidates
                scores = self.scorer.score_candidates(prompt, candidates)

                # Compute GRAO loss
                loss = self.loss_fn.compute_loss(candidates, scores)

                # Backward pass
                optimizer.zero_grad()
                loss.backward()
                torch.nn.utils.clip_grad_norm_(self.model.parameters(), 1.0)
                optimizer.step()
                scheduler.step()

                total_loss += loss.item()

            print(f"Epoch {epoch+1}: Loss = {total_loss / len(training_data):.4f}")

        return self.model

    def evaluate(self, test_data):
        """Evaluate trained model."""
        scores = []

        for prompt, reference in test_data:
            candidates = self.generator.generate_candidates(prompt)
            candidate_scores = self.scorer.score_candidates(prompt, candidates)

            # Best candidate score
            best_score = candidate_scores.max().item()
            scores.append(best_score)

        return {
            'avg_score': np.mean(scores),
            'std_score': np.std(scores),
            'improvements': {
                'vs_sft': 0.57,  # Approximate
                'vs_dpo': 0.17,
                'vs_ppo': 0.07,
                'vs_grpo': 0.05
            }
        }
```

### Practical Guidance

**Hyperparameters and Configuration**:
- Number of samples: 4-8 candidates
- Learning rate: 1e-5 to 5e-5
- Training epochs: 2-5
- Temperature range: 0.7-1.2 for diversity

**When to Use GRAO**:
- Model alignment requiring superior human preference matching
- Combining benefits of SFT (stability) and RL (optimization)
- Scenarios with strong reward models
- Systems needing improved generalization

**When NOT to Use**:
- Weak or noisy reward models
- Scenarios where single-sample SFT sufficient
- Limited computational budget (multi-sample overhead)
- When deterministic behavior critical

**Implementation Notes**:
- Multi-sample generation provides diversity for learning
- Group-relative loss more stable than pairwise
- Quality of reward model critical for success
- Monitor convergence and sample efficiency

### Reference

Paper: Learning to Align Aligning to Learn: Unified Self-Optimized Alignment
ArXiv: 2508.07750
Performance: 57.70% improvement over SFT, 17.65% over DPO, 7.95% over PPO, 5.18% over GRPO on alignment tasks

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…