arXiv (All)
open access
Learned Reporting Preferences in RLVR Can Conflict with the Current Request
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has become a prominent approach for improving language-model performance on reasoning tasks using automatically checked answers. Yet convention-matched evaluation cannot reveal whether reinforcing one reporting convention reduces adherence to a d
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Beyond Verbalized Confidence: Calibrating Reasoners with Differentiable Readouts#1129470
- Apriel-Reasoner: RL Post-Training for General-Purpose and Efficient Reasoning#984141
- Unlearnable, or Unmeasured? On the Reliability of Difficulty Labels in RLVR#1154382
- Unlearnable, or Unmeasured? On the Reliability of Difficulty Labels in RLVR#1136873
- Where the Verifier Fails: A Category-Level Audit of Reward Signals in RLVR#821295
Record · ID 1131788
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive