Abstract
We study data poisoning attacks in learning from human preferences. More specifically, we consider the problem of teaching/enforcing a target policy π^† by synthesizing preference data. We seek to understand the susceptibility of different preference-based learning paradigms to poisoned preference data by analyzing the number of samples required by the attacker to enforce π^†. We first propose a general data poisoning formulation in learning from human preferences and then study it for two popular paradigms, namely: (a) reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) that operates by learning a reward model using preferences; (b) direct preference optimization (DPO) that directly optimizes policy using preferences. We conduct a theoretical analysis of the effectiveness of data poisoning in a setting where the attacker is allowed to augment a pre-existing dataset and also study its special case where the attacker can synthesize the entire preference dataset from scratch. As our main results, we provide lower/upper bounds on the number of samples required to enforce π^†. Finally, we discuss the implications of our results in terms of the susceptibility of these learning paradigms under such data poisoning attacks.