arXiv:2609.00892v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Rubric-based reinforcement learning decomposes open-ended instructions into prompt-specific, flexible rubrics, making it better suited than reinforceme...
By Siyuan Li, Xinxin Song, Chen Ruinian, Jingjing Fan, Tingxiong Xiao, Yangen Hu, Ke Zeng, Jinli Suo
The paper identifies a flaw in rubric‑based reinforcement learning where additive reward aggregation allows policies to compensate for missing critical criteria, leading to higher scores but poorer answers, especially in clinical consultation tasks. It demonstrates that grouping rubric criteria into protocol‑level dimensions—so a dimension only counts when all its criteria are satisfied—mitigates this reward hacking. The proposed Protocol‑level Rubrics (ProRubric) improve appropriateness by 10.8 points without sacrificing coverage and achieve the best performance across seven benchmarks.
By Maoqi Liu, Junwei He, Bowen Zhang, Feiran Li, Wentao Ma, Rongyi Lin, Shuhan Zhong, Quan Fang
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.
By Darragh Quinn, David Dylan, Roisin Healy, Fionn Carroll, Maeve Donnelly, Cormac Sheehan
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.
By Chenyu Zhou
arXiv:2607. 18082v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Rubric-based RL has recently shown promise in improving LLMs on open-ended tasks.
By Mingxuan Xia, Yuhang Yang, Chao Ye, Shuai Zhu, Shenzhi Yang, Guangcheng Zhu, Yuhang Zhang, Cheng Peng, Haobo Wang, Siqing Wang
arXiv:2607. 18082v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Rubric-based RL has recently shown promise in improving LLMs on open-ended tasks.
By Mingxuan Xia, Yuhang Yang, Chao Ye, Shuai Zhu, Shenzhi Yang, Guangcheng Zhu, Yuhang Zhang, Cheng Peng, Haobo Wang, Siqing Wang
arXiv:2607. 00152v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Three of the most popular methods for training language models to reason look like three different tricks.
By Yong Yi Bay, Kathleen A. Yearick
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.
By Shubham Gandhi, Saurabh Goyal, Kiran Kate, Yara Rizk
The paper investigates two strategies for improving large language model (LLM) evaluation: specialized judge weights and rule‑based deferral policies. Experiments on nearly 100,000 rubric‑conditioned samples show that correct rubrics boost accuracy, while incorrect ones hurt it, and that splitting training data into criterion‑specific experts can severely degrade performance unless the experts are warm‑started from a unified model. The authors demonstrate that lightweight deferral cascades can match or exceed the accuracy of larger standalone judges at a fraction of the compute cost, and they provide practical design rules for building efficient, reliable LLM evaluators.
By Ye Chen, Weining Zhang
LLM-as-judge is essential for evaluating open-ended text and steering post-training, yet improving the judge itself typically relies on expensive annotations, reward models, or distillation from stron...
Agentic systems have widened the gap between producing candidate outputs and reviewing them. This paper asks a practical architectural question: should domain specialization be built into an evaluator's weights, or into the rule that decides when its judgment can be trusted?
AdaTutoRank introduces a setwise document reranker that uses Adaptive Tutoring Optimization (ATO) to provide graded supervision across nine rubric dimensions. By generating hint‑based silver labels, reinforcement rewards, and distillation cues tailored to each rollout’s quality, the method improves credit assignment for individual documents within a set. Experiments on ten benchmarks covering Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (RAG), deep research, and setwise evaluation show that AdaTutoRank achieves superior overall performance while reducing the number of retrieval calls.
By Kailin Jiang, Lei Liu, Jian Xi, Yangqi Chen, Hui Xu, Hongwei Zhao, Bin Li, Yu Lu, Haibo Shi