Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) with verifiable rewards has advanced large language models but remains underexplored for Vision-Language (VL) models. The Vision-Language Reward Model (VL-RM) is key to aligning VL models by providing structured feedback, yet training effective VL-RMs faces two major challenges. First, the bootstrapping dilemma arises as high-quality training data depends on already strong VL models, creating a cycle where self-generated supervision reinforces existing biases. Second, modality bias and negative example amplification occur when VL models hallucinate incorrect visual attributes, leading to flawed preference data that further misguides training. To address these issues, we propose an iterative training framework leveraging vision experts, Chain-of-Thought (CoT) rationales, and Margin-based Rejection Sampling. Our approach refines preference datasets, enhances structured critiques, and iteratively improves reasoning. Experiments across VL-RM benchmarks demonstrate superior performance in hallucination detection and multimodal reasoning, advancing VL model alignment with reinforcement learning.

Vision-language generative reward models (VL-GenRMs) play a crucial role in aligning and evaluating multimodal AI systems, yet their own evaluation remains under-explored. Current assessment methods primarily rely on AI-annotated preference labels from traditional VL tasks, which can introduce biases and often fail to effectively challenge state-of-the-art models. To address these limitations, we introduce VL-RewardBench, a comprehensive benchmark spanning general multimodal queries, visual hallucination detection, and complex reasoning tasks. Through our AI-assisted annotation pipeline combining sample selection with human verification, we curate 1,250 high-quality examples specifically designed to probe model limitations. Comprehensive evaluation across 16 leading large vision-language models, demonstrates VL-RewardBench's effectiveness as a challenging testbed, where even GPT-4o achieves only 65.4% accuracy, and state-of-the-art open-source models such as Qwen2-VL-72B, struggle to surpass random-guessing. Importantly, performance on VL-RewardBench strongly correlates (Pearson's r > 0.9) with MMMU-Pro accuracy using Best-of-N sampling with VL-GenRMs. Analysis experiments uncover three critical insights for improving VL-GenRMs: (i) models predominantly fail at basic visual perception tasks rather than reasoning tasks; (ii) inference-time scaling benefits vary dramatically by model capacity; and (iii) training VL-GenRMs to learn to judge substantially boosts judgment capability (+14.7% accuracy for a 7B VL-GenRM). We believe VL-RewardBench along with the experimental insights will become a valuable resource for advancing VL-GenRMs.