VerifyBench: Benchmarking Reference-based Reward Systems for Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.15801v2
• Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 17:17:45 GMT
• Title: VerifyBench: Benchmarking Reference-based Reward Systems for Large Language Models
• Authors: Yuchen Yan, Jin Jiang, Zhenbang Ren, Yijun Li, Xudong Cai, Yang Liu, Xin Xu, Mengdi Zhang, Jian Shao, Yongliang Shen, Jun Xiao, Yueting Zhuang,
• Abstract summary: OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 have achieved remarkable performance in the domain of reasoning.<n>A key component of their training is the incorporation of verifiable rewards within reinforcement learning.<n>Existing reward benchmarks do not evaluate reference-based reward systems.
• Score: 55.39064621869925
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large reasoning models such as OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 have achieved remarkable performance in the domain of reasoning. A key component of their training is the incorporation of verifiable rewards within reinforcement learning (RL). However, existing reward benchmarks do not evaluate reference-based reward systems, leaving researchers with limited understanding of the accuracy of verifiers used in RL. In this paper, we introduce two benchmarks, VerifyBench and VerifyBench-Hard, designed to assess the performance of reference-based reward systems. These benchmarks are constructed through meticulous data collection and curation, followed by careful human annotation to ensure high quality. Current models still show considerable room for improvement on both VerifyBench and VerifyBench-Hard, especially smaller-scale models. Furthermore, we conduct a thorough and comprehensive analysis of evaluation results, offering insights for understanding and developing reference-based reward systems. Our proposed benchmarks serve as effective tools for guiding the development of verifier accuracy and the reasoning capabilities of models trained via RL in reasoning tasks.

Related papers

• VerIF: Verification Engineering for Reinforcement Learning in Instruction Following [55.60192044049083]
  Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has become a key technique for enhancing large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose VerIF, a verification method that combines rule-based code verification with LLM-based verification from a large reasoning model.<n>We apply RL training with VerIF to two models, achieving significant improvements across several representative instruction-following benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-11T17:10:36Z)
• Intra-Trajectory Consistency for Reward Modeling [67.84522106537274]
  We develop an intra-trajectory consistency regularization to enforce that adjacent processes with higher next-token generation probability maintain more consistent rewards.<n>We show that the reward model trained with the proposed regularization induces better DPO-aligned policies and achieves better best-of-N (BON) inference-time verification results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-10T12:59:14Z)
• RewardBench 2: Advancing Reward Model Evaluation [71.65938693914153]
  Reward models are used throughout the post-training of language models to capture nuanced signals from preference data.<n>The community has begun establishing best practices for evaluating reward models.<n>This paper introduces RewardBench 2, a new multi-skill reward modeling benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T17:54:04Z)
• RAG-Zeval: Towards Robust and Interpretable Evaluation on RAG Responses through End-to-End Rule-Guided Reasoning [64.46921169261852]
  RAG-Zeval is a novel end-to-end framework that formulates faithfulness and correctness evaluation as a rule-guided reasoning task.<n>Our approach trains evaluators with reinforcement learning, facilitating compact models to generate comprehensive and sound assessments.<n>Experiments demonstrate RAG-Zeval's superior performance, achieving the strongest correlation with human judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T14:55:33Z)
• Pitfalls of Rule- and Model-based Verifiers -- A Case Study on Mathematical Reasoning [26.717777746219635]
  We take mathematical reasoning as a case study and conduct a comprehensive analysis of various verifiers in both static evaluation and RL training scenarios.<n>First, we find that current open-source rule-based verifiers often fail to recognize equivalent answers presented in different formats across commonly used mathematical datasets, resulting in non-negligible false negative rates.<n>We investigate model-based verifiers as a potential solution to address these limitations.<n>While the static evaluation shows that model-based verifiers achieve significantly higher verification accuracy, further analysis and RL training results imply that they are highly susceptible to hacking, where they misclassify certain patterns
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T10:28:41Z)
• Reward Reasoning Model [104.39256985858428]
  Reward Reasoning Models (RRMs) are designed to execute a deliberate reasoning process before generating final rewards.<n>We implement a reinforcement learning framework that fosters self-evolved reward reasoning capabilities.<n> Notably, RRMs can adaptively exploit test-time compute to further improve reward accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T17:58:03Z)
• Scoring Verifiers: Evaluating Synthetic Verification for Code and Reasoning [59.25951947621526]
  We propose an approach which can transform existing coding benchmarks into scoring and ranking datasets to evaluate the effectiveness of synthetic verifiers.<n>We release four new benchmarks (HE-R, HE-R+, MBPP-R, and MBPP-R+), and analyzed synthetic verification methods with standard, reasoning-based, and reward-based LLMs.<n>Our experiments show that reasoning can significantly improve test case generation and that scaling the number of test cases enhances the verification accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T15:32:11Z)
• Reinfier and Reintrainer: Verification and Interpretation-Driven Safe Deep Reinforcement Learning Frameworks [36.730973051834376]
  We propose a verification-driven interpretation-in-the-loop framework Reintrainer to develop trustworthy DRL models.<n>In each iteration, this framework measures the gap between the on-training model and predefined properties using formal verification.<n>Reinfier features breakpoints searching and verification-driven interpretation, associated with a concise constraint-encoding language DRLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-19T15:03:26Z)
• RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modeling [100.28366840977966]
  We present RewardBench, a benchmark dataset and code-base for evaluation of reward models. The dataset is a collection of prompt-chosen-rejected trios spanning chat, reasoning, and safety. On the RewardBench leaderboard, we evaluate reward models trained with a variety of methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-20T17:49:54Z)

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.