The paper introduces Circuit Reasoning Score (CRS), a data‑selection signal for reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards that uses attention‑head activity from a frozen base model to gauge reasoning engagement. CRS is computed in a single forward pass without reward labels or rollouts, and it shows that selecting problems with the lowest reasoning‑circuit engagement can outperform random selection on several medium‑difficulty benchmarks. However, the benefit depends on domain, model scale, and reward conditions, indicating that data selection in this setting is regime‑dependent rather than a fixed ranking of problem quality.
arXiv:2609.38850v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Decision models such as Jev answer questions with probabilities, which are only useful if they are calibrated. Open-source reproductions rely on superv...
The paper introduces Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) applied to small search agents, specifically training a Qwen3.5-0.8B model with Group Relative Policy Optimization and an interleaved Wikipedia-search tool on the MuSiQue dataset. Experiments varying reward shapes across three seeds show that RLVR can achieve a 3.8‑fold improvement over an untrained baseline, with the best run reaching a 0.352 average exact match. The study finds that the sparse exact‑match reward, standard in larger models, performs poorly for small models, indicating that reward design must be tailored rather than scaled down from large‑model recipes.
The paper introduces Step-wise Rubrics as Rewards (SRaR), a reinforcement learning framework that assigns rubric-based scores to individual reasoning steps in large language models. By normalizing step scores and combining them with outcome rewards through a decoupled advantage estimator, SRaR preserves criterion-level structure and mitigates issues like rewarding flawed steps or encouraging endless self‑correction. Experiments on 16K problems and six math benchmarks show that SRaR outperforms prior rubric methods, improving accuracy, increasing faithful reasoning rates, and reducing self‑correction loops.
arXiv:2606. 27369v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) for training LLMs typically rely on ground-truth answers to assign rewards, limiting their applicability to tasks where the ground-truth solution is unknown.
arXiv:2605.15464v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is widely used to improve the reasoning capability of language models, since model-gene...
arXiv:2608. 15445v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a reward is correct on every training example yet consistent with more than one goal, a model can acquire an unintended one, a failure known as goal misgeneralization.
arXiv:2607. 11506v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) optimizes LLMs using sparse verifiable final-answer rewards.
arXiv:2606. 17024v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sparse reward reinforcement learning (RL) has become a standard tool for improving LLM reasoning, but its success depends critically on the coverage present in the base model.
arXiv:2610.27012v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) trains a language model by sampling responses, scoring them with an automatic verifier, and upd...
arXiv:2608. 00220v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We show that on-policy reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) can improve the current objective while making successful behaviors for later objectives too rare to sample and reinforce.
arXiv:2608.30005v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Rubric-based reinforcement learning extends RL beyond tasks with exact answers or rule-based verifiers by scoring responses against instance-specific c...
arXiv:2610.16593v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) implemented with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) has driven substantial progress in tra...