GuideAlignment

A Practical Guide to Frontier Alignment Data

What alignment data actually is — SFT, RLHF, DPO, red teaming — how the formats differ, and how to specify quality so expert data improves your model instead of polluting it.

By Data Team

Frontier alignment data is expert-produced training and evaluation data used to align large model behavior with human intent during post-training. It spans supervised fine-tuning demonstrations, preference data for RLHF and DPO, reasoning traces, and adversarial red-teaming prompts.

The four formats that matter

SFT demonstrations

Prompt–response pairs where the response is exactly what you want the model to produce. Quality requirement: the response must be correct, not merely fluent — which is why generalist annotation pools fail on technical domains.

Preference data (RLHF / DPO)

Pairs or rankings of candidate responses judged against a rubric. The rubric is the product: ambiguous rubrics produce noisy preferences, and noisy preferences produce reward hacking.

Reasoning traces

Step-by-step chains of thought written or verified by domain experts. These are the highest-leverage and highest-cost format — a single wrong step teaches the model to be confidently wrong.

Adversarial / red-team data

Prompts designed to elicit failures, paired with annotations of what failed and why. Useful both for safety training and for building private evaluation sets.

How to specify quality

DimensionWeak specStrong spec
Expertise"experienced annotators"named domains, screening pass rates, calibration scores
Agreementunmeasuredper-dimension inter-annotator agreement targets
Gold tasksnoneseeded %, refresh cadence, drift thresholds
Reviewsingle passindependent dual review + disagreement resolution

The mistake most teams make

Buying volume before calibrating. Run a small pilot, measure agreement against your own researchers' judgments, fix the rubric, then scale. Data produced before calibration is usually a write-off.

Where this fits in the data engine

Alignment data is one cycle of a loop: evaluation findings define the next data specification. If your vendor cannot tell you which failure modes a batch is meant to close, you are buying data, not progress.