Goto

Collaborating Authors

 consistency reward model


CLARity: Reasoning Consistency Alone Can Teach Reinforced Experts

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Training expert LLMs in domains with scarce data is difficult, often relying on multiple-choice questions (MCQs). However, standard outcome-based reinforcement learning (RL) on MCQs is risky. While it may improve accuracy, we observe it often degrades reasoning quality such as logical consistency. Existing solutions to supervise reasoning, such as large-scale Process Reward Models (PRMs), are prohibitively expensive. To address this, we propose CLARity, a cost-effective RL framework that enhances reasoning quality using only a small, general-purpose LLM. CLARity integrates a consistency-aware reward mechanism with a 2-stage refine-then-monitor training pipeline to enhance reasoning consistency, and a dynamic data reformulation strategy to to better exploit limited data. Experiments demonstrate that CLARity improves response consistency by 16.5% and accuracy by 7.5% over baselines. Human evaluations further confirm holistic improvements in coherence and professionalism. Thus, CLARity offers a generalizable solution that enables smaller models to effectively guide expert models by reasoning consistency.Our code is open sourced at: https://github.com/Infinite-set/CLARity


LLM should think and action as a human

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

It is popular lately to train large language models to be used as chat assistants, but in the conversation between the user and the chat assistant, there are prompts, require multi-turns between the chat assistant and the user. However, there are a number of issues with the multi-turns conversation: The response of the chat assistant is prone to errors and can't help users achieve their goals, and as the number of conversation turns increases, the probability of errors will also increase; It is difficult for chat assistant to generate responses with different processes based on actual needs for the same prompt; Chat assistant require the use of tools, but the current approach is not elegant and efficient, and the number of tool calls is limited. The main reason for these issues is that large language models don't have the thinking ability as a human, lack the reasoning ability and planning ability, and lack the ability to execute plans. To solve these issues, we propose a thinking method based on a built-in chain of thought: In the multi-turns conversation, for each user prompt, the large language model thinks based on elements such as chat history, thinking context, action calls, memory and knowledge, makes detailed reasoning and planning, and actions according to the plan. We also explored how the large language model enhances thinking ability through this thinking method: Collect training datasets according to the thinking method and fine tune the large language model through supervised learning; Train a consistency reward model and use it as a reward function to fine tune the large language model using reinforcement learning, and the reinforced large language model outputs according to this way of thinking. Our experimental results show that the reasoning ability and planning ability of the large language model are enhanced, and the issues in the multi-turns conversation are solved.