arXiv Computation and Language

Tool Verification for Test-Time Reinforcement Learning

arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 9

RLVE: Scaling Up Reinforcement Learning for Language Models with Adaptive Verifiable Environments

arXiv:2511. 07317v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We introduce Reinforcement Learning (RL) with Adaptive Verifiable Environments (RLVE), an approach using verifiable environments that procedurally generate problems and provide algorithmically verifiable rewards, to scale up RL for language models (LMs).

By Zhiyuan Zeng, Hamish Ivison, Yiping Wang, Lifan Yuan, Shuyue Stella Li, Zhuorui Ye, Siting Li, Jacqueline He, Runlong Zhou, Tong Chen, Chenyang Zhao, Yulia Tsvetkov, Simon Shaolei Du, Natasha Jaques, Hao Peng, Pang Wei Koh, Hannaneh Hajishirzi
arXiv AI
Jul 14

SVR-R1: Bootstrapping Multi-modal Reasoning with Self-verification in Reinforcement Learning

arXiv:2607. 10966v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We introduce Self-Verified Reasoner (SVR-R1), a multi-turn RL framework that turns a model's own verification into a learning signal for multimodal reasoning.

By Mingyuan Wu, Jingcheng Yang, Shengyi Qian, Xudong Wang, Jize Jiang, Qifan Wang, Aashu Singh, Khoi Pham, Fei Liu, Zhaolun Su, Zhuokai Zhao, Klara Nahrstedt, Jianyu Wang, Hanchao Yu
arXiv AI
3d ago

Learning from the Test: Self-Referential Differential Testing for Deep RL Agents

The paper introduces Delta, a two‑phase framework for testing deep reinforcement learning agents. In the first phase, the agent under test is evaluated for catastrophic failures while collecting decision‑making data. The second phase trains a challenger agent from this data using offline RL; comparing the challenger’s rewards to the original agent reveals optimality bugs, and Delta successfully uncovered thousands of such issues across multiple environments.

By Junda He, Jieke Shi, Zhou Yang, Mingfei Cheng, David Lo
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 19

Debate Training Reduces Reward Hacking in RLAIF

The paper shows that fine‑tuning a large language model (LLM) with a debate framework—where a generator and a critic compete and a weaker LLM judge adjudicates—reduces reward hacking compared to standard reinforcement learning from AI feedback (RLAIF). In experiments on mathematics tasks, the debate approach keeps the judge’s performance stable, achieving a 45% higher peak validation accuracy than the RLAIF baseline and mitigating the rapid exploitation of judge errors. Additional findings indicate that weakening the judge speeds hacking unless countered by extra debate rounds, that debate can override misalignment prompts, and that word‑limit constraints on critiques help balance the game and prevent judge hacking. whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates a practical method to curb reward hacking in RL‑based AI systems, addressing a key obstacle for safely scaling AI oversight."

By Zachary Kenton, Lili Janzer, Rory Greig, Tian Huey Teh, Kirill Tyshchuk, Jonah Brown-Cohen, Harri Edwards, Senthooran Rajamanoharan, Noah Y. Siegel, Natasha Jaques, Rohin Shah
arXiv AI
Jun 3

Exploiting Verification-Generation Gap: Test-Time Reinforcement Learning with Confidence-Conditioned Verification

arXiv:2606. 03608v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Test-time reinforcement learning has emerged as a promising paradigm for enhancing the complex reasoning abilities of large language models in a completely label-free manner.

By Jiahui Li, Jianfeng Shan, Wenpei Chen, Shunyu Wu, Jian Lou, Wenjie Feng, Dan Li, See-Kiong Ng