arXiv AI

Process Rewards for Outcome-Guided Reasoning Steps in LLM Reinforcement Learning

arXiv AI
Sep 28

Stepwise Intrinsic Rewards for Reasoning in Large Language Models

The paper introduces Stepwise Marginal Information Gain (MIG), an intrinsic process reward that evaluates how each reasoning step of a large language model (LLM) or vision-language model (VLM) improves the likelihood of the reference answer. MIG rewards only new likelihood maxima, preventing duplicate credit, and is combined with outcome, format, and self‑distillation objectives to guide training. Experiments on eight benchmarks show that this method outperforms outcome‑only reinforcement learning and improves accuracy by up to 4.8 points over binary‑reward training, including a 12.6‑point gain on MathVerse and a 12.9‑point advantage on vision‑language transfer at 7B parameters.

By Xiangwei Wang, Wei Wang, Ken Chen, Nanduni Nimalsiri, Sachith Seneviratne, Saman Halgamuge
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 7

ConsensusBench: Benchmark of Consensus Nodes for LLM Reasoning via Outcome Reward Densifying

ConsensusBench is a new dataset that supplies rule‑based process‑level signals for large language model reasoning. It identifies key intermediate conclusions—called Consensus Nodes—by filtering correct trajectories and clustering semantically equivalent statements. By incorporating a process reward derived from these nodes into GRPO‑style reinforcement learning, the authors create ConsensusPR, which reduces reward sparsity and improves performance on benchmarks such as AIME, GSM8K, and MATH‑500.

By Shi-Qi Yan, Chao-Hong Tan, Qian Chen, Wen Wang, Xiangang Li, Zhen-Hua Ling
arXiv AI
4d ago

Verifiable Process Rewards for Agentic Reasoning

The paper introduces Verifiable Process Rewards (VPR), a framework that uses symbolic or algorithmic task-solving oracles as action-level verifiers to provide dense rewards for intermediate actions in agentic reasoning tasks. VPR is applied to Sokoban, Sudoku, and Minesweeper, and improves policy performance over outcome-reward baselines. The authors also demonstrate VPR’s effectiveness in a tool‑use benchmark, highlighting its reliance on reliable task oracles and the difficulty of extending it to less structured environments.

By Huining Yuan, Zelai Xu, Huaijie Wang, Xiangmin Yi, Jiaxuan Gao, Xiao-Ping Zhang, Yu Wang, Chao Yu, Yi Wu
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 29

The Weakest Link Tells It All: Outcome-Supervised Process Reward Modeling via Learnable Credit Assignment

arXiv:2606. 27739v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Process reward models (PRMs) enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by providing fine-grained feedback, yet training PRMs typically requires expensive stepwise annotations.

By Tianyu Jia, Yue Fang, Hongxin Ding, Rihong Qiu, Zhibang Yang, Zhijing Wu, Xu Chu, Junfeng Zhao, Yasha Wang
arXiv AI
Jun 9

Correct Is Not Enough: Training Reasoning Planners with Executor-Grounded Rewards

arXiv:2605. 03862v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards has become a common way to improve explicit reasoning in large language models, but final-answer correctness alone does not reveal whether the reasoning trace is faithful, reliable, or useful to the model that consumes it.

By Tianyang Han, Hengyu Shi, Junjie Hu, Xu Yang, Zhiling Wang, Junhao Su