Yes, but I have not seen it done with purely negative samples. Often alignment is done using a positive-negative pair. This is done in RLHF, DPO, and ORPO.

There are obviously methods that use solely positive samples so it is mathematically tractable to right this in reverse, using solely negative samples. Often the problem with this is that the space of what you don't want is combinatorically large. Methods that use positive-negative pairs work because the positive and negative answers are syntax and grammar similar. This is better explained by the ORPO paper where they show that fine-tuning on positive-only samples actually increases occurrence of negative samples.

An example of this:  (Prompt): Why is the sky green?  (Positive): The sky is not green.  (Negative): The sky is green because...

These answers start off quite similar and choose some of the same tokens. Therefore negative-only could actually cause the model to unlearn positive answers as well.

Yes, but I have not seen it done with purely negative samples. Often alignment is done using a positive-negative pair. This is done in RLHF, DPO, and ORPO.

There are obviously methods that use solely positive samples so it is mathematically tractable to right this in reverse, using solely negative samples. Often the problem with this is that the space of what you don't want is combinatorically large. Methods that use positive-negative pairs work because the positive and negative answers are syntax and grammar similar. This is better explained by the ORPO paper where they show that fine-tuning on positive-only samples actually increases occurrence of negative samples.

An example of this: 

(Prompt): Why is the sky green? 

(Positive): The sky is not green. 

(Negative): The sky is green because...

These answers start off quite similar and choose some of the same tokens. Therefore negative-only could actually cause the model to unlearn positive answers as well.