Two Heads Are Better Than One: Dual-Model Verbal Reflection at Inference-Time

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.19230v2
• Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2025 20:21:29 GMT
• Title: Two Heads Are Better Than One: Dual-Model Verbal Reflection at Inference-Time
• Authors: Jiazheng Li, Yuxiang Zhou, Junru Lu, Gladys Tyen, Lin Gui, Cesare Aloisi, Yulan He,
• Abstract summary: We propose a Dual-model Reflective Scoring framework featuring a dedicated Critic model trained for effective reflection.<n>DARS achieves strong performance and consistently outperforms existing ASAS baselines across all evaluation metrics.
• Score: 22.397964526411812
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Although preference optimization methods have improved reasoning performance in Large Language Models (LLMs), they often lack transparency regarding why one reasoning outcome is preferred over another. This limitation is especially critical in Automated Student Answer Scoring (ASAS), where explainability is essential to justify assessment outcomes. Verbal reinforcement learning offers the potential to generate explicit reflection, but it tends to produce superficial critiques that can harm assessment performance. Existing LLMs also struggle to reliably detect subtle reasoning errors in ASAS tasks. Moreover, manually identifying intermediate reasoning errors is expensive and difficult to scale. To address these challenges, we introduce a contrastive reflection synthesis pipeline that generates precise verbal feedback by identifying discrepancies in structure reasoning graph paths. Leveraging these synthetic reflection data, we propose DARS, a Dual-model Reflective Scoring framework featuring a dedicated Critic model trained for effective reflection. DARS achieves strong performance and consistently outperforms existing ASAS baselines across all evaluation metrics. Extensive experiments further provide novel insights into the value of reflection data, framework design, and the scaling behavior of DARS. We release the DARS code at https://github.com/lijiazheng99/DARS.

Related papers

• Teaching Large Reasoning Models Effective Reflection [62.73646680747003]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have recently shown impressive performance on complex reasoning tasks.<n>However, not all reflections are beneficial-many are superficial, offering little to no improvement over the original answer.<n>We first propose Self-Critique Fine-Tuning (SCFT), a training framework that enhances the model's reflective reasoning ability using only self-generated critiques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T04:51:53Z)
• Structured Reasoning for Large Language Models [59.215789462977206]
  We propose Structured Reasoning (SCR), a framework that decouples reasoning trajectories into explicit, evaluable, and trainable components.<n>SCR substantially improves reasoning efficiency and self-verification.<n>Compared with existing reasoning paradigms, it reduces output token length by up to 50%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-12T04:04:01Z)
• When Actions Teach You to Think: Reasoning-Action Synergy via Reinforcement Learning in Conversational Agents [2.689316553293938]
  Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) has emerged as one of the most effective ways to improve the performance of large language models (LLMs) in downstream tasks.<n>We propose a pipeline in which LLMs generate reasoning steps that guide both the invocation of tools and the final answer generation for conversational agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-12T04:44:40Z)
• Self-Consistency as a Free Lunch: Reducing Hallucinations in Vision-Language Models via Self-Reflection [71.8243083897721]
  Vision-language models often hallucinate details, generating non-existent objects or inaccurate attributes that compromise output reliability.<n>We present a novel framework that leverages the model's self-consistency between long responses and short answers to generate preference pairs for training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-27T10:37:11Z)
• From Harm to Help: Turning Reasoning In-Context Demos into Assets for Reasoning LMs [58.02809208460186]
  We revisit this paradox using high-quality traces from DeepSeek-R1 as demonstrations.<n>We find that adding more exemplars consistently degrades accuracy, even when demonstrations are optimal.<n>We introduce Insight-to-solve (I2S), a sequential test-time procedure that turns demonstrations into explicit, reusable insights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-27T08:59:31Z)
• SAMULE: Self-Learning Agents Enhanced by Multi-level Reflection [14.40651157974557]
  SAMULE is a new framework for self-learning agents powered by a retrospective language model that is trained based on Multi-Level Reflection Synthesis.<n>It first synthesizes high-quality reflections across three complementary levels: Single-Trajectory Learning (micro-level) for detailed error correction; Intra-Task Learning (meso-level) to build error across multiple trials of the same task, and Inter-Task Learning (macro-level) to extract transferable insights based on same typed errors from diverse task failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T21:02:15Z)
• Efficient Reasoning Through Suppression of Self-Affirmation Reflections in Large Reasoning Models [29.615519143908998]
  Self-affirmation reflections are redundant reflective steps that affirm prior content and often occur after the already correct reasoning steps.<n>We show that suppressing self-affirmation reflections reduces output length without degrading accuracy across multiple models.<n>We also improve current train-based method by explicitly suppressing such reflections.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-14T05:30:09Z)
• Perceptual Decoupling for Scalable Multi-modal Reasoning via Reward-Optimized Captioning [78.17782197231325]
  We propose a reasoning-guided reinforcement learning strategy that aligns the extractor's captioning behavior with the reasoning objective.<n> Experiments on multi-modal math and science benchmarks show that the proposed RACRO method achieves state-of-the-art average performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T02:28:07Z)
• SRPO: Enhancing Multimodal LLM Reasoning via Reflection-Aware Reinforcement Learning [25.02860760920562]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown promising capabilities in reasoning tasks, but struggle with complex problems requiring explicit self-reflection and self-correction.<n>Existing reflection methods are simplistic and struggle to generate meaningful and instructive feedback.<n>We propose Multimodal Self-Reflection enhanced reasoning with Group Relative Policy Optimization (SRPO), a two-stage reflection-aware reinforcement learning framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T14:21:44Z)
• REA-RL: Reflection-Aware Online Reinforcement Learning for Efficient Large Reasoning Models [33.05490585699939]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) demonstrate strong performance in complex tasks but often face the challenge of overthinking.<n>Existing approaches synthesize shorter reasoning responses for LRMs to learn, but are inefficient for online usage due to the time-consuming data generation and filtering processes.<n>We propose REA-RL, which introduces a small reflection model for efficient scaling in online training, offering both parallel sampling and sequential revision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-26T11:47:16Z)
• LARES: Latent Reasoning for Sequential Recommendation [96.26996622771593]
  We present LARES, a novel and scalable LAtent REasoning framework for Sequential recommendation.<n>Our proposed approach employs a recurrent architecture that allows flexible expansion of reasoning depth without increasing parameter complexity.<n>Our framework exhibits seamless compatibility with existing advanced models, further improving their recommendation performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T16:22:54Z)
• Think Deep, Think Fast: Investigating Efficiency of Verifier-free Inference-time-scaling Methods [39.89239733570008]
  This work conducts a comprehensive analysis of inference-time scaling methods for both reasoning and non-reasoning models. We find that non-reasoning models, even with an extremely high inference budget, still fall substantially behind reasoning models. For reasoning models, majority voting proves to be a robust inference strategy, generally competitive or outperforming other more sophisticated ITC methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T19:32:55Z)
• Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models [54.04678363287392]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex tasks. Recent advancements in OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 have further improved performance in System-2 reasoning domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T17:59:38Z)
• Satori: Reinforcement Learning with Chain-of-Action-Thought Enhances LLM Reasoning via Autoregressive Search [57.28671084993782]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities across diverse domains.<n>Recent studies have shown that increasing test-time computation enhances LLMs' reasoning capabilities.<n>We propose a two-stage training paradigm: 1) a small-scale format tuning stage to internalize the COAT reasoning format and 2) a large-scale self-improvement stage leveraging reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T17:26:58Z)
• BRiTE: Bootstrapping Reinforced Thinking Process to Enhance Language Model Reasoning [78.63421517563056]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex reasoning tasks.<n>We present a unified probabilistic framework that formalizes LLM reasoning through a novel graphical model.<n>We introduce the Bootstrapping Reinforced Thinking Process (BRiTE) algorithm, which works in two steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-31T02:39:07Z)
• RealCritic: Towards Effectiveness-Driven Evaluation of Language Model Critiques [59.861013614500024]
  We introduce a new benchmark designed to assess the critique capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Unlike existing benchmarks, which typically function in an open-loop fashion, our approach employs a closed-loop methodology that evaluates the quality of corrections generated from critiques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-24T13:48:10Z)
• What Makes In-context Learning Effective for Mathematical Reasoning: A Theoretical Analysis [81.15503859645149]
  In this paper, we aim to theoretically analyze the impact of in-context demonstrations on large language models' reasoning performance.<n>We propose a straightforward, generalizable, and low-complexity demonstration selection method named LMS3.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T11:38:11Z)
• Vision-Language Models Can Self-Improve Reasoning via Reflection [20.196406628954303]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) has proven to improve the reasoning capability of large language models (LLMs) We propose a self-training framework, R3V, which iteratively enhances the model's Vision-language Reasoning by Reflecting on CoT Rationales. Our approach supports self-reflection on generated solutions, further boosting performance through test-time computation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T14:45:00Z)
• PRefLexOR: Preference-based Recursive Language Modeling for Exploratory Optimization of Reasoning and Agentic Thinking [0.0]
  PRefLexOR combines preference optimization with concepts from Reinforcement Learning to enable models to self-teach. We focus on applications in biological materials science and demonstrate the method in a variety of case studies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T08:46:26Z)
• Reflective Instruction Tuning: Mitigating Hallucinations in Large Vision-Language Models [36.119299938503936]
  Large vision-language models (LVLMs) have shown promising performance on a variety of vision-language tasks. They remain susceptible to hallucinations, generating outputs misaligned with visual content or instructions. We propose reflective instruction tuning, which integrates rationale learning into visual instruction tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T06:32:45Z)
• LLMs-as-Instructors: Learning from Errors Toward Automating Model Improvement [93.38736019287224]
  "LLMs-as-Instructors" framework autonomously enhances the training of smaller target models. Inspired by the theory of "Learning from Errors", this framework employs an instructor LLM to meticulously analyze the specific errors within a target model. Within this framework, we implement two strategies: "Learning from Error," which focuses solely on incorrect responses to tailor training data, and "Learning from Error by Contrast", which uses contrastive learning to analyze both correct and incorrect responses for a deeper understanding of errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-29T17:16:04Z)
• Towards Effective Evaluations and Comparisons for LLM Unlearning Methods [97.2995389188179]
  This paper seeks to refine the evaluation of machine unlearning for large language models.<n>It addresses two key challenges -- the robustness of evaluation metrics and the trade-offs between competing goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T14:41:00Z)
• Learning From Correctness Without Prompting Makes LLM Efficient Reasoner [30.203952806009717]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated outstanding performance across various tasks, yet they still exhibit limitations such as hallucination, unfaithful reasoning, and toxic content. We introduce an intrinsic self-correct reasoning framework for LLMs that eliminates the need for human feedback, external tools, and handcraft prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-28T02:12:49Z)
• Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals [67.64770842323966]
  Causal explanations of predictions of NLP systems are essential to ensure safety and establish trust. Existing methods often fall short of explaining model predictions effectively or efficiently. We propose two approaches for counterfactual (CF) approximation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-01T07:31:04Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.