Erase to Improve: Erasable Reinforcement Learning for Search-Augmented LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.00861v1
• Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2025 13:10:36 GMT
• Title: Erase to Improve: Erasable Reinforcement Learning for Search-Augmented LLMs
• Authors: Ziliang Wang, Kang An, Xuhui Zheng, Faqiang Qian, Weikun Zhang, Cijun Ouyang, Jialu Cai, Yuhang Wang, Yichao Wu,
• Abstract summary: We propose Erasable Reinforcement Learning (ERL), a novel framework that transforms fragile reasoning into a robust process.<n>ERL explicitly identifies faulty steps, erases them, and regenerates reasoning in place, preventing defective logic from propagating through the reasoning chain.<n>Models trained with ERL, termed ESearch, achieve substantial improvements on HotpotQA, MuSiQue, 2Wiki, and Bamboogle.
• Score: 18.37387666170851
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: While search-augmented large language models (LLMs) exhibit impressive capabilities, their reliability in complex multi-hop reasoning remains limited. This limitation arises from three fundamental challenges: decomposition errors, where tasks are incorrectly broken down; retrieval missing, where key evidence fails to be retrieved; and reasoning errors, where flawed logic propagates through the reasoning chain. A single failure in any of these stages can derail the final answer. We propose Erasable Reinforcement Learning (ERL), a novel framework that transforms fragile reasoning into a robust process. ERL explicitly identifies faulty steps, erases them, and regenerates reasoning in place, preventing defective logic from propagating through the reasoning chain. This targeted correction mechanism turns brittle reasoning into a more resilient process. Models trained with ERL, termed ESearch, achieve substantial improvements on HotpotQA, MuSiQue, 2Wiki, and Bamboogle, with the 3B model achieving +8.48% EM and +11.56% F1, and the 7B model achieving +5.38% EM and +7.22% F1 over previous state-of-the-art(SOTA) results. These findings suggest that erasable reinforcement learning provides a powerful paradigm shift for robust multi-step reasoning in LLMs.

Related papers

• Are Reasoning LLMs Robust to Interventions on Their Chain-of-Thought? [79.86483056611105]
  Reasoning LLMs generate step-by-step chains of thought before giving an answer.<n>How robust are these reasoning traces to disruptions that occur within them?<n>We introduce a controlled evaluation framework that perturbs a model's own CoT at fixed timesteps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-07T10:02:58Z)
• 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)
• From Sufficiency to Reflection: Reinforcement-Guided Thinking Quality in Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning for LLMs [13.410543801811992]
  This paper analyzes existing RAG reasoning models and identifies three main failure patterns.<n>We propose TIRESRAG-R1, a novel framework using a think-retrieve-reflect process and a multi-dimensional reward system.<n>Experiments on four multi-hop QA datasets show that TIRESRAG-R1 outperforms prior RAG methods and generalizes well to single-hop tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T14:29:44Z)
• Lost at the Beginning of Reasoning [82.18834329384514]
  We show that the first reasoning step exerts a disproportionately large influence on the final prediction.<n>We propose an efficient sampling strategy that leverages a reward model to identify and retain high-quality first reasoning steps.<n>We introduce a new benchmark specifically constructed with deliberately flawed first reasoning steps to systematically evaluate model self-correction capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-27T09:53:57Z)
• Beyond Accuracy: Dissecting Mathematical Reasoning for LLMs Under Reinforcement Learning [93.00629872970364]
  Reinforcement learning (RL) has become the dominant paradigm for improving the performance of language models on complex reasoning tasks.<n>We introduce SPARKLE, a fine-grained analytic framework to dissect the effects of RL across three key dimensions.<n>We study whether difficult problems -- those yielding no RL signals and mixed-quality reasoning traces -- can still be effectively used for training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T07:53:59Z)
• Interleaved Reasoning for Large Language Models via Reinforcement Learning [22.403928213802036]
  Long chain-of-thought (CoT) enhances large language models' (LLM) reasoning capabilities.<n>We propose a novel training paradigm that uses reinforcement learning (RL) to guide reasoning LLMs to interleave thinking and answering for multi-hop questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-26T07:58:17Z)
• Do Theory of Mind Benchmarks Need Explicit Human-like Reasoning in Language Models? [14.29992535286614]
  Theory of Mind (ToM) is the ability to attribute mental states to others.<n>Recent advancements in Large Language Models have shown promising performance on ToM benchmarks.<n>Do these benchmarks necessitate explicit human-like reasoning processes, or can models succeed through alternative strategies?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-02T12:58:42Z)
• Logic-RL: Unleashing LLM Reasoning with Rule-Based Reinforcement Learning [23.99454995087634]
  We explore the potential of rule-based reinforcement learning in large reasoning models.<n>We use synthetic logic puzzles as training data due to their controllable complexity and straightforward answer verification.<n>Our 7B model develops advanced reasoning skills-such as reflection, verification, and summarization-that are absent from the logic corpus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T17:49:26Z)
• Language Models are Hidden Reasoners: Unlocking Latent Reasoning Capabilities via Self-Rewarding [74.31981011985681]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities, but still struggle with complex reasoning tasks requiring multiple steps. We introduce LaTent Reasoning Optimization (LaTRO), a principled framework that formulates reasoning as sampling from a latent distribution. We validate LaTRO through experiments on GSM8K and ARC-Challenge datasets using multiple model architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T22:02:30Z)
• A Closer Look at the Self-Verification Abilities of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoning [73.77088902676306]
  We take a closer look at the self-verification abilities of large language models (LLMs) in the context of logical reasoning. Our main findings suggest that existing LLMs could struggle to identify fallacious reasoning steps accurately and may fall short of guaranteeing the validity of self-verification methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T07:13:10Z)
• Beyond Task Performance: Evaluating and Reducing the Flaws of Large Multimodal Models with In-Context Learning [105.77733287326308]
  We evaluate 10 recent open-source LMMs from 3B up to 80B parameter scale, on 5 different axes; hallucinations, abstention, compositionality, explainability and instruction following. We explore the training-free in-context learning (ICL) as a solution, and study how it affects these limitations. Based on our ICL study, (3) we push ICL further and propose new multimodal ICL variants such as; Multitask-ICL, Chain-of-Hindsight-ICL, and Self-Correcting-ICL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-01T12:02:59Z)

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.