REVIEW 8 cited by
Promoting Efficient Reasoning with Verifiable Stepwise Reward
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Promoting Efficient Reasoning with Verifiable Stepwise Reward
read the original abstract
Large reasoning models (LRMs) have recently achieved significant progress in complex reasoning tasks, aided by reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards. However, LRMs often suffer from overthinking, expending excessive computation on simple problems and reducing efficiency. Existing efficient reasoning methods typically require accurate task assessment to preset token budgets or select reasoning modes, which limits their flexibility and reliability. In this work, we revisit the essence of overthinking and identify that encouraging effective steps while penalizing ineffective ones is key to its solution. To this end, we propose a novel rule-based verifiable stepwise reward mechanism (VSRM), which assigns rewards based on the performance of intermediate states in the reasoning trajectory. This approach is intuitive and naturally fits the step-by-step nature of reasoning tasks. We conduct extensive experiments on standard mathematical reasoning benchmarks, including AIME24 and AIME25, by integrating VSRM with PPO and Reinforce++. Results show that our method achieves substantial output length reduction while maintaining original reasoning performance, striking an optimal balance between efficiency and accuracy. Further analysis of overthinking frequency and pass@k score before and after training demonstrates that our approach in deed effectively suppresses ineffective steps and encourages effective reasoning, fundamentally alleviating the overthinking problem. All code will be released upon acceptance.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
Fine-Tuning Small Reasoning Models for Quantum Field Theory
Small 7B reasoning models were fine-tuned on synthetic and curated QFT problems using RL and SFT, yielding performance gains, error analysis, and public release of data and traces.
-
$\pi$-Play: Multi-Agent Self-Play via Privileged Self-Distillation without External Data
Self-play’s natural question-construction paths supply free privileged information that turns sparse-reward self-play into dense self-distillation, yielding stronger data-free search agents.
-
HiPRAG: Hierarchical Process Rewards for Efficient Agentic Retrieval Augmented Generation
HiPRAG adds hierarchical process rewards to RL training for agentic RAG, reducing over-search to 2.3% and achieving 65.4-67.2% accuracy on seven QA benchmarks across 3B and 7B models.
-
ThoughtFold: Folding Reasoning Chains via Introspective Preference Learning
ThoughtFold applies introspective redundancy detection within correct CoT trajectories to create sub-trajectory spectra, then uses masked preference optimization to penalize redundant explorations, yielding 56% token ...
-
$\pi$-Play: Multi-Agent Self-Play via Privileged Self-Distillation without External Data
π-Play uses self-generated question construction paths as privileged information in multi-agent self-distillation to convert sparse-reward self-play into a dense-feedback loop, surpassing supervised search agents and ...
-
LocalSearchBench: Benchmarking Agentic Search in Real-World Local Life Services
LocalSearchBench—1.3M merchant records and 900 multi-hop local-life QA tasks across 9 Chinese cities—shows the best reasoning agent reaches only 35.6% correctness.
-
Modularized Reinforcement Learning on LLMs: From MDP Creation to Exploration and Learning
Survey mapping RL techniques onto LLM training and highlighting gaps in value-based, off-policy, and bootstrapping methods.
-
Trust Region On-Policy Distillation
TrOPD stabilizes on-policy distillation for LLMs with trust-region learning, outlier estimation, and off-policy guidance, outperforming prior OPD methods on reasoning and code benchmarks.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.