Mitigating Factual Hallucination in Large Reasoning Models via Mixed-Mode Advantage Regularization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.05861v1
• Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2026 05:34:25 GMT
• Title: Mitigating Factual Hallucination in Large Reasoning Models via Mixed-Mode Advantage Regularization
• Abstract summary: In factuality-oriented question answering (QA), explicit thinking often improves overall performance by helping the model recover relevant knowledge and refine its answers.<n>We propose MARGO, a reinforcement learning framework that uses non-thinking rollouts as same-model references in advantage estimation.
• Score: 47.64132795594338
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) improve language model capabilities by generating explicit thinking traces before final answers. In factuality-oriented question answering (QA), such thinking often improves overall performance by helping the model recover relevant knowledge and refine its answers. However, we find that this benefit is not uniform at the instance level: explicit thinking can also overturn correct non-thinking answers and lead to factual drift. We refer to this failure mode as \emph{thinking-induced hallucination}. To explain this phenomenon, we formulate explicit thinking in factuality QA as a thinking residual over the model's direct-answer tendency, which can either recover missing knowledge or introduce unsupported associations. Based on this formulation, we propose MARGO, \underline{\textit{M}}ixed-Mode \underline{\textit{A}}dvantage \underline{\textit{R}}egularization for \underline{\textit{G}}rounded \underline{\textit{O}}ptimization, a reinforcement learning framework that uses non-thinking rollouts as same-model references in advantage estimation. By constructing mixed-mode rollout groups with both thinking and non-thinking trajectories, MARGO evaluates whether explicit thinking adds factual value beyond direct answering, thereby suppressing hallucination-prone thinking while preserving beneficial thinking behaviors. Experiments across multiple factuality-oriented QA benchmarks demonstrate that MARGO improves factual reliability over strong baselines, while evaluations on mathematical benchmarks show that it preserves general reasoning ability.

Related papers

• Beyond Correctness: Benchmarking and Aligning Response Behaviors in Hybrid-Thinking MLLMs [46.40763822929566]
  We study whether thinking and non-thinking interfaces preserve acceptable final-response behavior.<n>PatternEval tests four recurrent failures: chain-of-thought leakage, response repetition, logical contradiction, and performative reasoning.<n>We develop textbfPatternRM, a response-level reward model, and textbfPatternRL, which introduces pattern-specific penalties during reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-13T03:44:45Z)
• Thinking Past the Answer: Evaluating Harmful Overthinking in Large Reasoning Models [38.84286306535778]
  We show that stopping at the first correct prefix improves accuracy over standard reasoning up to 21%.<n>While common efficiency strategies like early stopping substantially reduce verbose overthinking, they fail to mitigate harmful overthinking.<n>Our findings generalize to language-only reasoning benchmarks, highlighting harmful overthinking as a broader reliability risk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-01T19:59:27Z)
• Recursive Think-Answer Process for LLMs and VLMs [54.52289112197118]
  We propose an efficient Recursive Think-Answer Process (R-TAP)<n>R-TAP enables models to engage in iterative reasoning cycles and generate more accurate answers.<n>We show that R-TAP-enhanced models consistently outperform conventional single-pass methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T17:20:10Z)
• Accordion-Thinking: Self-Regulated Step Summaries for Efficient and Readable LLM Reasoning [62.680551162054975]
  We introduce an end-to-end framework where LLMs learn to self-regulate the granularity of the reasoning steps through dynamic summarization.<n>We apply reinforcement learning to incentivize this capability further, uncovering a critical insight: the accuracy gap between the highly efficient Fold mode and the exhaustive Unfold mode progressively narrows.<n>Our Accordion-Thinker demonstrates that with learned self-compression, LLMs can tackle complex reasoning tasks with minimal dependency token overhead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T08:34:20Z)
• CTRL-RAG: Contrastive Likelihood Reward Based Reinforcement Learning for Context-Faithful RAG Models [29.703793991791674]
  Existing RAG-oriented reinforcement learning methods rely on external rewards that often fail to evaluate document faithfulness.<n>We propose a novel "internal-external" hybrid reward framework centered on a Contrastive Likelihood Reward (CLR)<n>CLR directly optimize the log-likelihood gap between responses conditioned on prompts with and without supporting evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T12:21:59Z)
• MR-Align: Meta-Reasoning Informed Factuality Alignment for Large Reasoning Models [43.872922223495586]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) show strong capabilities in complex reasoning, yet their marginal gains on evidence-dependent factual questions are limited.<n>We find this limitation is partially attributable to a reasoning-answer hit gap, where the model identifies the correct facts during reasoning but fails to incorporate them into the final response.<n>We propose MR-ALIGN, a framework that enhances factuality without relying on external verifiers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-27T15:00:54Z)
• Does Thinking More always Help? Mirage of Test-Time Scaling in Reasoning Models [130.5487886246353]
  Extending thinking traces using prompts like "Wait" or "Let me rethink" can improve performance.<n>This raises a natural question: Does thinking more at test-time truly lead to better reasoning?<n>We show a consistent pattern of initial performance improvements from additional thinking followed by a decline, due to "overthinking"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-04T17:55:09Z)
• Let LRMs Break Free from Overthinking via Self-Braking Tuning [68.93713497579853]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) have significantly enhanced their reasoning capabilities by generating longer chains of thought.<n>This performance gain comes at the cost of a substantial increase in redundant reasoning during the generation process.<n>We propose a novel framework, Self-Braking Tuning (SBT), which tackles overthinking from the perspective of allowing the model to regulate its own reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T16:53:40Z)
• Language Models with Rationality [57.37201135072838]
  Large language models (LLMs) are proficient at question-answering (QA) It is not always clear how (or even if) an answer follows from their latent "beliefs"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T17:04:25Z)

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.