REVIEW 8 cited by
OVM, Outcome-supervised Value Models for Planning in Mathematical Reasoning
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
OVM, Outcome-supervised Value Models for Planning in Mathematical Reasoning
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with maintaining accuracy throughout multiple multiple reasoning steps, especially in mathematical reasoning where an error in earlier steps can propagate to subsequent ones and it ultimately leading to an incorrect answer. To reduce error propagation, guided decoding is employed to direct the LM decoding on a step-by-step basis. We argue that in guided decoding, assessing the potential of an incomplete reasoning path can be more advantageous than simply ensuring per-step correctness, as the former approach leads towards a correct final answer. This transforms the task into a $\textit{value estimation}$ problem in planning. Inspired by the findings that $\textit{outcome supervision for guided decoding essentially acts as a value model}$, we propose Outcome-supervised Value Model (OVM) that employs outcome supervision for training a value model, which prioritizes steps that lead to accurate conclusions. Furthermore, the OVM eliminates the need for labor-intensive annotations of step-level correctness, thereby significantly enhancing its scalability. Our experiments on two multi-step mathematical reasoning datasets, GSM8K and Game of 24, demonstrate the superior performance of the OVM model. Notably, in GSM8K, our $\textbf{OVM-7B model achieves state-of-the-art results among LLMs up to 13B parameters}$; especially it does not utilize GPT-4 or code execution. These findings offer a novel perspective on the role of outcome supervision in training value models for multi-step reasoning tasks and provide theoretical justification for its advantage in value estimation for guided decoding.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
Beyond Verifiable Rewards: Rubric-Based GRM for Reinforced Fine-Tuning SWE Agents
A rubric-based generative reward model improves reinforced fine-tuning of SWE agents by supplying richer behavioral guidance than binary terminal rewards alone.
-
Process Supervision of Confidence Margin for Calibrated LLM Reasoning
RLCM trains LLMs with a margin-enhanced process reward that widens the gap between correct and incorrect reasoning steps, improving calibration on math, code, logic, and science tasks without hurting accuracy.
-
Rewarding Progress: Scaling Automated Process Verifiers for LLM Reasoning
Process advantage verifiers trained to predict step-level progress under a distinct prover policy improve LLM reasoning accuracy by over 8% and sample efficiency by 5-6x over outcome reward models.
-
Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision
OmegaPRM automates collection of 1.5 million process supervision labels via binary-search MCTS, raising Gemini Pro math accuracy from 51% to 69.4% on MATH500 and Gemma2 27B from 42.3% to 58.2%.
-
Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations
Math-Shepherd is an automatically trained process reward model that scores solution steps to verify and reinforce LLMs, lifting Mistral-7B from 77.9% to 89.1% on GSM8K and 28.6% to 43.5% on MATH.
-
Reducing Credit Assignment Variance via Counterfactual Reasoning Paths
Introduces IBPO, a counterfactual credit assignment method that turns sparse terminal rewards into process-level advantage estimates for more stable LLM reasoning training.
-
Goldilocks RL: Tuning Task Difficulty to Escape Sparse Rewards for Reasoning
A teacher-driven sampling method selects appropriately difficult questions for student models in GRPO-based RL to improve reasoning performance under fixed compute on OpenMathReasoning.
-
From System 1 to System 2: A Survey of Reasoning Large Language Models
The survey organizes the shift of LLMs toward deliberate System 2 reasoning, covering model construction techniques, performance on math and coding benchmarks, and future research directions.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.