Reinforcement learning increasingly relies on an LLM judge to score each rubric criterion, and that judge acts as the reward model during training. Before such a signal can be trusted, we need to know how capable the judge must be and how biased it is.
arXiv:2608. 13564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating language-model agents at scale increasingly relies on a second language model as an automatic judge, because the gold signal, an executable environment reward, is expensive, slow, or unavailable at deployment time.
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:2609.14248v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Faithful citation attribution begins with identifying the intended source for a scientific claim. We study this source-identification capability thro...
arXiv:2608. 01559v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Adversarial self-play is an appealing recipe for legal reasoning: have a student model draft an argument, have an adversary attack it, and reward the student when its argument survives the attack.
arXiv:2607. 11172v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning for deep-search agents has largely focused on trajectory-level scoring -- outcome correctness, citation-aware rewards, and evidence coverage.
arXiv:2609.23053v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A RAG system can hand you the right answer and cite a source it did not actually use. Models output these unfaithful citations via post-rationalization...
DRACO introduces a method for fine‑grained credit assignment in long‑horizon reinforcement learning tasks that lack verifiable rewards. It dynamically generates multi‑criteria rubrics during training, scores them once per trajectory, and redistributes the resulting judgment over the steps responsible for each rubric to produce differentiated per‑step advantages. Experiments on AppWorld and Tau‑Bench show that DRACO outperforms baseline models and other rubric‑based approaches, achieving significant performance gains without relying on verifiers.
DRACO introduces a method for fine‑grained credit assignment in long‑horizon reinforcement learning tasks that lack verifiable rewards. It dynamically generates multi‑criteria rubrics during training, scores them once per trajectory, and redistributes the resulting judgment over the steps responsible for each rubric to produce differentiated per‑step advantages. Experiments on AppWorld and Tau‑Bench show significant performance gains over baseline models and other rubric‑based approaches, even without using any verifiers.
arXiv:2607. 02104v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as cheap, scalable judges that compare candidate outputs pairwise -- to rank responses, select models, or triage papers.
arXiv:2607. 05904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training a language model against its own reference-free judgments (the premise of self-rewarding, self-play, and LLM-as-a-judge pipelines) assumes a model's verdict on a shown answer tracks correctness.
arXiv:2608. 11669v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning against rubrics, lists of criteria graded by an LLM judge, has become a standard way to post-train language models on tasks with no deterministic answer.
arXiv:2608.21376v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Many NLP tasks require systems to provide attribution in their outputs--i.e. citations to grounding sources. Attribution serves as a bulwark against...