arXiv AI By Haolong Qian, Xianliang Yang, Yinuo ma, Lirong Che, Feng Lu, Ye Guo, Lei Song, Jiang Bian, Chun Yuan

The Quality-Utility Paradox: Why High-Reward Data Impairs Small Model Mathematical Reasoning

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2606. 16152v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Knowledge distillation from powerful reasoning models is widely used to improve Small Language Models (SLMs) on mathematical reasoning, often assuming that traces with higher reward model scores provide more useful supervision.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Jun 30

Beyond Scaling Law: A Data-Efficient Distillation Framework for Reasoning

arXiv:2508. 09883v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable reasoning capabilities in tasks such as algorithmic coding and mathematical problem-solving.

By Xiaojun Wu, Xiaoguang Jiang, Huiyang Li, Jucai Zhai, Dengfeng Liu, Qiaobo Hao, Huang Liu, Zhiguo Yang, Ji Xie, Ninglun Gu, Jin Yang, Kailai Zhang, Yelun Bao, Jun Wang
arXiv AI
Sep 17

OBC-Prune: Outcome-Based Calibration for Large Reasoning Model Pruning

OBC‑Prune introduces an outcome‑based calibration approach for pruning large reasoning models, focusing on the causal importance of each reasoning sentence rather than uniform activation salience. By pairing correct and incorrect rollouts and using intervention‑based analysis, it assigns per‑token weights that guide one‑shot pruning methods such as SparseGPT, Wanda, and ALPS. Experiments on DeepSeek‑R1‑Distill‑Qwen models show consistent accuracy gains and shorter reasoning traces across multiple benchmarks at 40‑50% sparsity.

By Ha Lan Nguyen, Huy Hoang Tran, Trac-Duy Tran, Dung D. Le
arXiv AI
Aug 28

From Accuracy to Robustness: A Study of Rule- and Model-based Verifiers in Mathematical Reasoning

The paper investigates the reliability of rule- and model-based verifiers used in reinforcement learning with verifiable reward (RLVR) for mathematical reasoning. It finds that rule-based verifiers often miss equivalent answers in different formats, causing false negatives that degrade RL performance as models improve. Model-based verifiers achieve higher static accuracy but become vulnerable to reward hacking during RL, misclassifying certain response patterns as correct after fine-tuning.

By Yuzhen Huang, Weihao Zeng, Xingshan Zeng, Qi Zhu, Junxian He
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 1

Unlocking Fine-Grained Translation Quality Estimation in LRMs through Mutually Boosting Implicit and Explicit Reasoning

arXiv:2605.31378v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) still struggle with fine-grained translation quality estimation (QE), even with long reasoning chains. We argue that...

By Renfei Dang, Xinye Wang, Zhejian Lai, Weilu Xu, Shimin Tao, Daimeng Wei, Min Zhang, Shujian Huang
arXiv AI
3d ago

LSR-Ben: A Logical and Scientific Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating Process Reward Models

The paper introduces LSR‑Ben, a benchmark designed to evaluate process reward models (PRMs) on scientific and logical reasoning tasks, addressing a gap left by existing math‑focused benchmarks. Experiments on 22 models reveal that PRMs and LLMs perform poorly in non‑mathematical domains, with LLMs tending to over‑identify errors while PRMs tend to overlook them. LSR‑Ben aims to spur research that broadens PRM applicability and improves LLM reasoning.

By Zhouhao Sun, Xuan Zhang, Xiao Ding, Bibo Cai, Li Du, Kai Xiong, Xinran Dai, Fei Zhang, weidi tang, Zhiyuan Kan, Yang Zhao, Bing Qin, Ting Liu