Abductive Preference Learning

Frontier large language models such as GPT-5 and Claude Sonnet remain prone to overconfidence even after alignment through Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). For instance, they tend to offer the same conservative answer "No" to both questions "Can I eat the [food / potato chips] that has been left out overnight?" despite the latter requiring no refridgeration for safe consumption. We find that this failure is potentially attributed to a limitation of existing preference learning: it emphasizes selecting the correct response for a given prompt, while neglecting counterfactual prompts that should alter the response. To address this limitation, we propose abductive preference learning, a fine-tuning paradigm that reverses the conventional conditioning by learning preferences over prompts given a response. To validate this idea, we construct an abductive dataset derived from the HaluEval QA benchmark with 1,001 entries, implementing abductive DPO and its variant DPOP. Experiments reveal complementary strengths: standard methods improve response selection, abductive methods improve prompt discrimination, while a multitask objective unifies both. On the abductive dataset, multitask DPOP boosts accuracy from $90.0\%$ to $99.5\%$ in response selection and $54.7\%$ to $85.0\%$ in prompt discrimination, with qualitative evidence highlighting improved sensitivity to prompt differences. Finally, evaluation on AlpacaEval shows multitask DPOP improves win rate (from $5.26\%$ to $6.17\%$), confirming that abductive preference learning preserves the benefits of conventional preference optimization while addressing the overlooked challenge of counterfactual prompts.