Inference-Time Scaling of Verification: Self-Evolving Deep Research Agents via Test-Time Rubric-Guided Verification

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15808v1
• Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 09:47:31 GMT
• Title: Inference-Time Scaling of Verification: Self-Evolving Deep Research Agents via Test-Time Rubric-Guided Verification
• Abstract summary: Recent advances in Deep Research Agents (DRAs) are transforming automated knowledge discovery and problem-solving.<n>We propose an alternative paradigm: self-evolving the agent's ability by iteratively verifying the policy model's outputs, guided by meticulously crafted rubrics.<n>We present DeepVerifier, a rubrics-based outcome reward verifier that leverages the asymmetry of verification.
• Score: 71.98473277917962
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advances in Deep Research Agents (DRAs) are transforming automated knowledge discovery and problem-solving. While the majority of existing efforts focus on enhancing policy capabilities via post-training, we propose an alternative paradigm: self-evolving the agent's ability by iteratively verifying the policy model's outputs, guided by meticulously crafted rubrics. This approach gives rise to the inference-time scaling of verification, wherein an agent self-improves by evaluating its generated answers to produce iterative feedback and refinements. We derive the rubrics based on an automatically constructed DRA Failure Taxonomy, which systematically classifies agent failures into five major categories and thirteen sub-categories. We present DeepVerifier, a rubrics-based outcome reward verifier that leverages the asymmetry of verification and outperforms vanilla agent-as-judge and LLM judge baselines by 12%-48% in meta-evaluation F1 score. To enable practical self-evolution, DeepVerifier integrates as a plug-and-play module during test-time inference. The verifier produces detailed rubric-based feedback, which is fed back to the agent for iterative bootstrapping, refining responses without additional training. This test-time scaling delivers 8%-11% accuracy gains on challenging subsets of GAIA and XBench-DeepResearch when powered by capable closed-source LLMs. Finally, to support open-source advancement, we release DeepVerifier-4K, a curated supervised fine-tuning dataset of 4,646 high-quality agent steps focused on DRA verification. These examples emphasize reflection and self-critique, enabling open models to develop robust verification capabilities.

Related papers

• RSIBench-Data: Benchmarking Data-Centric Research for Recursive Self-Improvement [27.641105176473136]
  Existing benchmarks entangle research decisions with optimization, serving, evaluation, and systems implementation.<n>We introduce RSIBench-Data, a benchmark of LLM agents as data-centric researchers with a fixed post-training stack.<n>We evaluate four frontier agents on six benchmarks across software engineering, terminal use, scientific question answering, and mathematics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-28T15:46:41Z)
• DeepBias: Adaptive In-depth Probing of Social Biases in LVLMs [71.85279836937578]
  We introduce DeepBias, an adaptive framework for the in-depth probing of social biases in LVLMs with carefully designed agents.<n>We build a benchmark named DeepBiasBench using our framework. By employing an ensemble of five diverse state-of-the-art LVLMs as anchors, the benchmark captures vulnerabilities shared across architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-13T08:19:09Z)
• Perception, Verdict, and Evolution: Hindsight-Driven Self-Refining Forensics Agent for AI-Generated Image Detection [80.15317858033534]
  ForeAgent is an agentic forensics framework for AI-generated image detection with iterative self-evolution.<n>ForeAgent achieves state-of-the-art performance on the Chameleon benchmark, reaching 82.18% accuracy.<n>ForeAgent produces more consistent and causally grounded reasoning compared to GPT-5 and GPT-5-mini.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-25T02:59:33Z)
• Reinforced Agent: Inference-Time Feedback for Tool-Calling Agents [6.158612515104146]
  We introduce Helpfulness-Harmfulness metrics to measure the tradeoff between agent feedback and reviewer feedback.<n>We evaluate our approach on BFCL and Tau2-Bench (multi-turn stateful scenarios), achieving +5.5% on irrelevance detection and +7.1% on multi-turn tasks.<n>Our metrics reveal that reviewer model choice is critical: the reasoning model o3-mini achieves a 3:1 benefit-to-risk ratio versus 2.1:1 for GPT-4o.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-29T22:09:47Z)
• AJ-Bench: Benchmarking Agent-as-a-Judge for Environment-Aware Evaluation [71.49152943451328]
  We introduce a benchmark AJ-Bench to evaluate Agent-as-a-Judge across three domains-search, data systems, and graphical user interfaces-comprising 155 tasks and 516 annotated trajectories.<n>Experiments demonstrate consistent performance gains over LLM-as-a-Judge baselines, while also revealing substantial open challenges in agent-based verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-20T13:23:38Z)
• AgentV-RL: Scaling Reward Modeling with Agentic Verifier [63.55502685076245]
  Verifiers have been demonstrated to enhance LLM reasoning via test-time scaling (TTS)<n>We propose Agentic Verifier, a framework that transforms reward modeling into a multi-turn, tool-augmented deliberative process.<n>We show that Agentic Verifier yields consistent performance gains under both parallel and sequential TTS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-17T12:27:36Z)
• FT-Dojo: Towards Autonomous LLM Fine-Tuning with Language Agents [25.60249598832918]
  FT-Dojo is an interactive environment comprising 13 tasks across 5 domains.<n>We develop FT-Agent, an autonomous system that mirrors human experts by leveraging evaluation-driven feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T10:37:11Z)
• Label Curation Using Agentic AI [3.500372926575144]
  We present AURA, an agentic AI framework for large-scale, multi-modal data annotation.<n>AURA coordinates multiple AI agents to generate and validate labels without requiring ground truth.<n>AURA achieves accuracy improvements of up to 5.8% over baseline.<n>In more challenging settings with poor quality annotators, the improvement is up to 50% over baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T18:58:52Z)
• Sponge Tool Attack: Stealthy Denial-of-Efficiency against Tool-Augmented Agentic Reasoning [58.432996881401415]
  Recent work augments large language models (LLMs) with external tools to enable agentic reasoning.<n>We propose Sponge Tool Attack (STA), which disrupts agentic reasoning solely by rewriting the input prompt.<n>STA generates benign-looking prompt rewrites from the original one with high semantic fidelity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-24T19:36:51Z)
• Repurposing Synthetic Data for Fine-grained Search Agent Supervision [81.95597592711688]
  LLM-based search agents are increasingly trained on entity-centric synthetic data.<n> prevailing training methods discard this rich entity information, relying instead on sparse, outcome-based rewards.<n>We introduce Entity-aware Group Relative Policy Optimization (E-GRPO), a novel framework that formulates a dense entity-aware reward function.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T17:50:40Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Towards Robust Fact-Checking: A Multi-Agent System with Advanced Evidence Retrieval [1.515687944002438]
  The rapid spread of misinformation in the digital era poses significant challenges to public discourse.<n>Traditional human-led fact-checking methods, while credible, struggle with the volume and velocity of online content.<n>This paper proposes a novel multi-agent system for automated fact-checking that enhances accuracy, efficiency, and explainability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-22T02:39:27Z)
• ReVeal: Self-Evolving Code Agents via Reliable Self-Verification [11.875519107421312]
  We introduce ReVeal, a reinforcement learning framework that evolves code generation through self-verification and tool-based evaluation.<n>At inference, this strengthened self-verification enables the model to use self-constructed tests and tool feedback to continuously evolve code for 20+ turns on LiveCodeBench despite training on only three.<n>These findings highlight the promise of ReVeal as a scalable paradigm for RL training and test-time scaling, paving the way for more robust and autonomous AI agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-13T03:41:04Z)
• Trust, But Verify: A Self-Verification Approach to Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards [67.86091419220816]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) show great promise in complex reasoning.<n>A prevalent issue is superficial self-reflection'', where models fail to robustly verify their own outputs.<n>We introduce RISE (Reinforcing Reasoning with Self-Verification), a novel online RL framework designed to tackle this.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T17:59:31Z)
• On the Role of Feedback in Test-Time Scaling of Agentic AI Workflows [71.92083784393418]
  Agentic AI (systems that autonomously plan and act) are becoming widespread, yet their task success rate on complex tasks remains low.<n>Inference-time alignment relies on three components: sampling, evaluation, and feedback.<n>We introduce Iterative Agent Decoding (IAD), a procedure that repeatedly inserts feedback extracted from different forms of critiques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-02T17:40:47Z)
• Thinking Longer, Not Larger: Enhancing Software Engineering Agents via Scaling Test-Time Compute [61.00662702026523]
  We propose a unified Test-Time Compute scaling framework that leverages increased inference-time instead of larger models.<n>Our framework incorporates two complementary strategies: internal TTC and external TTC.<n>We demonstrate our textbf32B model achieves a 46% issue resolution rate, surpassing significantly larger models such as DeepSeek R1 671B and OpenAI o1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-31T07:31:32Z)
• CoTAR: Chain-of-Thought Attribution Reasoning with Multi-level Granularity [8.377398103067508]
  We introduce an attribution-oriented Chain-of-Thought reasoning method to enhance the accuracy of attributions.<n> Evaluations on two context-enhanced question-answering datasets using GPT-4 demonstrate improved accuracy and correctness of attributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T12:37:10Z)

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.