--- license: apache-2.0 task_categories: - text-generation language: - en tags: - dpo - preference - process-reward-model - code-critic size_categories: - 1K **Not the paper's DPO data.** This is an earlier set of 1,541 preference pairs used for development DPO sweeps. The released critic [Qwen3-4B-Critic-SFT-DPO](https://huggingface.co/code-critic-model/Qwen3-4B-Critic-SFT-DPO) from [Steer, Don't Solve](https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.21811) was trained on a different set of 1,409 pairs built with the same procedure. See the [organization page](https://huggingface.co/code-critic-model) for the artifacts behind the paper. # PRM_1541i 1541 preference pairs for training a critic over coding-agent trajectories. Each example is a multi-turn agent transcript paired with two candidate critiques — one preferred, one rejected. A critique is a structured error analysis over 12 categories, each with a `DETECTED: Yes/No` verdict and, when detected, `EVIDENCE` and `RECOVERY_ACTION` fields, closing with `TASK_STATUS` and `OVERALL_GUIDANCE`. ## Format ShareGPT / LLaMA-Factory layout (`dataset_info.json` included): ```json { "messages": [{"role": "system", ...}, {"role": "user", ...}, ...], "chosen": {"role": "assistant", "content": "SPECIFICATION ERRORS:\n1. ..."}, "rejected": {"role": "assistant", "content": "SPECIFICATION ERRORS:\n1. ..."} } ``` `messages` ends on a user turn; `chosen` and `rejected` are single assistant messages. To use with TRL's conversational preference format: ```python from datasets import load_dataset def to_preference(example): return { "prompt": example["messages"], "chosen": [example["chosen"]], "rejected": [example["rejected"]], } dataset = load_dataset("code-critic-model/PRM_1541i", split="train") dataset = dataset.map(to_preference, remove_columns=["messages"]) dataset = dataset.train_test_split(test_size=0.1, seed=42) # 1386 train / 155 eval ``` ## Length filtering Pre-filtered so that every pair fits whole in **8192 tokens** under the `Qwen/Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507` tokenizer, measured the way `DPOTrainer` measures it (render with the chat template, then tokenize `prompt` and `prompt + completion`). Nothing is truncated or dropped at train time. Prompts are long — around 7000 tokens — and completions are around 580. ## Statistics Measured over all 1541 pairs: | | | |---|---| | pairs | 1541 | | median prompt length | ~7000 tokens | | median completion length | ~580 tokens | | `OVERALL_GUIDANCE` share of completion | 12.5% (median 74 tokens) | | pairs where chosen/rejected flip >= 1 `DETECTED` verdict | 892 (57.9%) | | pairs differing in prose only (identical verdicts) | 649 (42.1%) | | median flipped `DETECTED` labels per pair | 1 | | median char similarity, pre-`OVERALL_GUIDANCE` section | 0.399 | | pairs whose common prefix reaches `OVERALL_GUIDANCE` | 8.2% | The last three rows matter for anyone planning to slice this data. The chosen and rejected critiques are **not** identical up to the guidance paragraph — they diverge a median of ~1859 characters before `OVERALL_GUIDANCE` begins, and the categorization sections differ substantially. Training only on the `OVERALL_GUIDANCE` span would discard ~87% of the tokens and most of the signal. Slicing by pair type does not help either: in a DPO run on this data, the verdict-flip subset scored 0.620 held-out preference accuracy and the prose-only subset 0.618 — statistically indistinguishable. ## Models trained on this dataset - [`code-critic-model/Qwen3-4B-DPO-beta0.1-sft0.25-lr1e-6-bs32-ep1`](https://huggingface.co/code-critic-model/Qwen3-4B-DPO-beta0.1-sft0.25-lr1e-6-bs32-ep1) — 0.619 held-out preference accuracy vs 0.516 for the base model.