analiza aiqbench
This research reframes stepwise reasoning verification as a natural language inference task, demonstrating that small encoder classifiers significantly outperform large generative decoders in accuracy and data efficiency. The findings suggest that robust verification of complex mathematical and scientific problems does not require massive parameter counts, offering a more scalable approach for evaluating LLM reasoning chains.
Stepwise Reasoning Verification: Don't Generate, Classify!
arXiv:2610.25441v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Verifying the reasoning of large language models is increasingly important as they are applied to complex mathematical and scientific problems. Existing work focuses on large decoder models and reports mixed results for generative and discriminative verifiers, leaving unclear which paradigm is more effective and whether large models are necessary. In this work, we cast stepwise verification as a natural language inference task: the problem and partial solution prefix form the premise, while the next reasoning step serves as the hypothesis to be classified as entailed or non-entailed. This formulation enables error localisation at individual reasoning steps and direct comparison of encoder classification, decoder classification, and decoder verdict generation across model scales and annotation budgets. Across five reasoning datasets, a 0.15B encoder classifier outperforms most generative verifiers with up to 4B parameters. On identical decoder backbones, classification outperforms generation from 0.5B to 4B parameters and matches it on the strongest 7B backbone---reaching comparable performance with roughly one tenth as many annotated problems. Our findings establish classification as a parameter- and data-efficient approach to stepwise verification and show that strong verification does not require large generative decoders.
Title:Stepwise Reasoning Verification: Don't Generate, Classify!
Abstract:Verifying the reasoning of large language models is increasingly important as they are applied to complex mathematical and scientific problems. Existing work focuses on large decoder models and reports mixed results for generative and discriminative verifiers, leaving unclear which paradigm is more effective and whether large models are necessary. In this work, we cast stepwise verification as a natural language inference task: the problem and partial solution prefix form the premise, while the next reasoning step serves as the hypothesis to be classified as entailed or non-entailed. This formulation enables error localisation at individual reasoning steps and direct comparison of encoder classification, decoder classification, and decoder verdict generation across model scales and annotation budgets. Across five reasoning datasets, a 0.15B encoder classifier outperforms most generative verifiers with up to 4B parameters. On identical decoder backbones, classification outperforms generation from 0.5B to 4B parameters and matches it on the strongest 7B backbone---reaching comparable performance with roughly one tenth as many annotated problems. Our findings establish classification as a parameter- and data-efficient approach to stepwise verification and show that strong verification does not require large generative decoders.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.25441 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.25441v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.25441 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 283 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
DTKG: Dual-Track Knowledge Graph-Verified Reasoning Framework for Multi-Hop QA
arXiv · 3 iun. 2026
The Error You See Is Not the Error You Made: Progression-aware Reasoning Origin for Reasoning Error Localization
arXiv · 29 sept. 2026
Can LLMs Reason Like Automated Theorem Provers for Rust Verification? VCoT-Bench: Evaluating via Verification Chain of Thought
arXiv · 19 aug. 2026
Scaling LLM Reasoning from Minimal Labels: A Semi-Supervised Framework with a Lightweight Verifier
arXiv · 17 iun. 2026