The paper introduces Chart‑RVR, a reinforcement‑learning framework that trains chart‑reasoning agents to produce monitorable, verifiable outputs. It decomposes reasoning into three auditable stages—Structure, Evidence, and Derivation—allowing stakeholders to trace how the model reads the chart, extracts data, and computes the answer. Experiments on six benchmarks show that Chart‑RVR matches or exceeds state‑of‑the‑art accuracy while delivering rationales that are far more verifiable and evidence‑grounded than existing methods.
arXiv:2606. 16603v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in data-intensive analytical tasks, yet their outputs are rarely verifiable: a reliance on linear text trajectories makes their reasoning difficult to audit.
arXiv:2606. 04503v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has greatly advanced large reasoning models (LRMs), but it requires timely training on a huge fully-annotated dataset.
The paper introduces TRACE, a digital‑advertising diagnostic environment that uses simulated interventions to generate verifiable rewards for training reasoning agents. By injecting controlled interventions into a simulator, the hidden cause of anomalies becomes an oracle label, enabling agents to learn to identify root causes and affected segments through noisy, confounded evidence. Experiments show that reinforcement learning with these synthesized rewards outperforms large prompted baselines, achieving higher accuracy while using fewer tool calls.
The paper introduces a framework for evaluating AI systems that not only checks final labels but also tracks the reasoning behind them through three core sources—grounds, norms, and authority—forming an eight-cell counterfactual judgment cube. It defines minimal source replacement sets, called judgment receipts, to explain changes in verdicts and provides certification cost bounds for black-box evaluators. The authors present ReasonBench, a benchmark with 19,520 cases, and demonstrate that while high standard accuracy can mask robustness issues, receipt accuracy reveals significant gaps in reasoning consistency across different models.
arXiv:2606. 19782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Financial chart question answering in regulated settings demands more than accuracy: practitioners must know which answers to trust before acting on them, and many institutions cannot send client data to external model providers.
ReFIne is a training framework that augments large reasoning models with three trustworthiness properties: interpretability, faithfulness, and reliability. It combines supervised fine‑tuning with GRPO to produce structured, tag‑based reasoning traces, explicitly disclose decisive information, and provide self‑assessments of soundness and confidence. Applied to Qwen3 models, ReFIne improves interpretability by 44.0 %, faithfulness by 18.8 %, and reliability by 42.4 % on mathematical benchmarks.
arXiv:2606. 05263v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards improves reasoning and tool use, yet long-horizon language agents still learn unsupported evidence chains, belief drift, and shortcut actions that satisfy terminal checks.
The paper introduces Proof‑R1, a reinforcement‑learning framework that trains large language models to generate verifiable proofs for natural‑language logical reasoning tasks. Proof‑R1 only accepts a generated conclusion into the proof state when it satisfies formal verification constraints, ensuring each reasoning step is machine‑checkable. The method also reconstructs the dependency closure that supports the final answer, aligning credit with valid proof steps, and shows improved answer accuracy and verifiability across multiple benchmarks and models.
arXiv:2609.21492v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has been shown to improve the performance of large language models (LLMs), yet existing optimization methods largely r...
arXiv:2606. 20068v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) typically has relied on a single binary verification signal, symbolic proof assistants in formal reasoning offer rich, fine-grained structured feedback.
GraphCert introduces a method to bootstrap graph reasoning agents by generating graph‑grounded question‑answer pairs and certifying the supporting evidence. The approach uses a Bootstrapped Graph Quizzer to produce QA pairs, then executes and semantically curates the evidence into certified rubrics that guide reward‑based training of a Graph Solver. Experiments on five GRBENCH domains show GraphCert outperforms larger LLM agents and demonstrates robust policy transfer across heterogeneous graphs.
VeriHarness is a method that enhances verification for large language model agents tackling long‑horizon tasks without needing reference answers at test time. It transforms the base LLM into an agentic verifier by providing a workspace, evidence tools, and reusable verification skills, using disagreement resolution and consensus challenge to evaluate competing claims. Across five benchmarks and two frontier models, VeriHarness outperforms baselines, achieving significant performance gains and demonstrating self‑improvement of verification skills from failure feedback.