Logical Reasoning with Outcome Reward Models for Test-Time Scaling (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Logical reasoning is a critical benchmark for evaluating the capabilities of large language models (LLMs), but it is under-explored in deductive reasoning. |
| Approach: | They propose to use Chain-of-Thought to generate data using single and multiple samples to train ORMs. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model expands the type of errors covered in the training dataset, covering previously unexplored error types. |
Similar Papers
A Comprehensive Survey of Process Reward Models: Data Generation, Model Construction, and Usage (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Congmin Zheng, Jiachen Zhu, Zhuoying Ou, Yuxiang Chen, Kangning Zhang, Rong Shan, Zeyu Zheng, Mengyue Yang, Jianghao Lin, Yong Yu, Weinan Zhang
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) have advanced reasoning ability, yet conventional alignment remains dominated by outcome reward models that judge only final answers. |
| Approach: | They summarize applications across math, code, text, multimodal reasoning, robotics, and agents . goal is to clarify design spaces, reveal open challenges, and guide future research toward fine-grained, robust reasoning alignment. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model enables finer credit assignment, richer diagnostics, and improved robustness. |
Scaling Evaluation-Time Compute with Reasoning Models as Evaluators (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Seungone Kim, Ian Wu, Jinu Lee, Xiang Yue, Seongyun Lee, Minkyeong Moon, Carolin Lawrence, Kiril Gashteovski, Julia Hockenmaier, Graham Neubig, Sean Welleck
| Challenge: | Language model (LM) evaluators that generate chain-of-thought reasoning are widely used for the assessment of LM responses. |
| Approach: | They investigate whether increasing LMs' "thinking" time through scaling test-time compute can improve an LM's evaluation capability. |
| Outcome: | The proposed reasoning models improve evaluation performance monotonically with the number of reasoning tokens generated, mirroring trends seen in LM reasoning. |
ReEfBench: Quantifying the Reasoning Efficiency of LLMs (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for Chain-of-Thought evaluations do not distinguish between genuine reasoning and mere verbosity. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework for the non-intrusive, comprehensive process-centric evaluation of reasoning grounded in First-Order Logic. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework identifies four distinct behavioral prototypes and diagnoses the failure modes. |
Retrieval-Augmented Process Reward Model for Generalizable Mathematical Reasoning (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) have advanced mathematical reasoning, but they still struggle with out-of-distribution (OOD) issues. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to evaluate the logical validity of reasoning steps . they retrieves semantically similar questions and steps for PRM as a warmup . |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms baseline models on multiple real-world datasets. |
Out of Distribution, Out of Luck: Process Rewards Misguide Reasoning Models (2026.eacl-short)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | 80% of reasoning model outputs respond to formatting artifacts rather than mathematical content. |
| Approach: | They evaluate process reward models that provide step-level feedback during inference . they identify distinct reward prediction patterns that differentiate reasoning from non-reasoning model outputs . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model fails to enhance and sometimes degrade reasoning model performance. |
Process Reward Models Meet Planning: Generating Precise and Scalable Datasets for Step-Level Rewards (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing PRM datasets are expensive to construct and limited to the mathematical domain. |
| Approach: | They propose a method to generate a corpus of one million reasoning steps using the Planning Domain Definition Language. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model generates a corpus of approximately one million reasoning steps across various PDDL domains and trains them. |
Towards Inference-time Scaling for Continuous Space Reasoning (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in reasoning large language models have expanded along training and inferencetime dimensions. |
| Approach: | They propose to use COCONUT (CITATION) continuous space reasoning LM as the backbone to generate diverse reasoning paths through dropout-based sampling. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method could enable performance gains similar to those observed in the discrete space, but only marginally improves in the continuous space. |
Correct, Concise and Complete: Multi-stage Training For Adaptive Reasoning (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) increase test-time computation, often in the form of chain-of-thought (CoT) however, reasoning traces can become unnecessarily long, increasing computation costs without improving accuracy and sometimes even degrading performance. |
| Approach: | They propose a multi-stage efficient reasoning method that combines supervised fine-tuning with reinforcement learning using an adaptive length penalty. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method reduces response length by an average of 28% for 8B models and 40% for 32B models while incurring only minor performance drops of 1.6 and 2.5 points, respectively. |
Accelerating LLM Reasoning via Early Rejection with Partial Reward Modeling (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly relied upon for solving complex reasoning tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to use Process Reward Models to scale inference time compute by generating in parallel . they propose to provide early signals that enable the rejection of suboptimal candidates before full generation of step is complete. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method achieves 1.4 – 9 reduction in inference FLOPs without degrading final performance. |
Can Large Language Models Detect Errors in Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning? (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yancheng He, Shilong Li, Jiaheng Liu, Weixun Wang, Xingyuan Bu, Ge Zhang, Z.y. Peng, Zhaoxiang Zhang, Zhicheng Zheng, Wenbo Su, Bo Zheng
| Challenge: | Recent advances in o1-like models have generated long Chain-of-Thought reasoning steps to improve the reasoning abilities of existing Large Language Models (LLMs). |
| Approach: | They propose a DeltaBench to analyze the quality and effectiveness of o1-like models and measure their ability to detect errors in long COT reasoning. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can detect errors in long COT reasoning. |