aiqbench analysis
This paper introduces Rubric Curriculum RL (RcRL), a method that leverages the generation-verification gap to improve reinforcement learning in open-ended domains where ground-truth rewards are unavailable. By combining pairwise preferences with a curriculum over rubric criteria, RcRL avoids reward hacking and outperforms baselines on creative writing and health benchmarks without requiring new data or stronger teacher models.
Rubric Curriculum RL: Exploiting the Generation-Verification Gap in Non-Verifiable Domains
arXiv:2611.06244v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has led to significant gains in math and code generation. Extending these gains to open-ended domains remains challenging: ground-truth verification is unavailable, human annotation is expensive, and learned reward models are prone to reward hacking. The generation-verification gap, where judging good outputs is easier than producing them, offers a potential path to improvement. However, rubric-based judges are often imprecise and stationary, so policies can overfit or reward hack them. We introduce Rubric Curriculum RL (RcRL), which exploits this gap without new data, human annotations, or stronger teacher models. We combine pairwise preferences over rollouts with a curriculum over rubric criteria, yielding a more discriminative signal than absolute scoring and a non-stationary objective. Whereas baselines plateau within a few hundred steps, RcRL preserves output entropy and keeps improving past 1000 steps. On creative writing, RcRL achieves a 70.5% human win rate against the base model, with gains across benchmarks and judges. On HealthBench, RcRL improves over the base model by 14.6% (full set) and 25.4% (consensus subset), outperforming all training baselines, including instance-specific rubrics.
Abstract:Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has led to significant gains in math and code generation. Extending these gains to open-ended domains remains challenging: ground-truth verification is unavailable, human annotation is expensive, and learned reward models are prone to reward hacking. The generation-verification gap, where judging good outputs is easier than producing them, offers a potential path to improvement. However, rubric-based judges are often imprecise and stationary, so policies can overfit or reward hack them. We introduce Rubric Curriculum RL (RcRL), which exploits this gap without new data, human annotations, or stronger teacher models. We combine pairwise preferences over rollouts with a curriculum over rubric criteria, yielding a more discriminative signal than absolute scoring and a non-stationary objective. Whereas baselines plateau within a few hundred steps, RcRL preserves output entropy and keeps improving past 1000 steps. On creative writing, RcRL achieves a 70.5% human win rate against the base model, with gains across benchmarks and judges. On HealthBench, RcRL improves over the base model by 14.6% (full set) and 25.4% (consensus subset), outperforming all training baselines, including instance-specific rubrics.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2611.06244 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2611.06244v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.06244 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 276 words