Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2609.06100

VERPO: Verified Evidence Regularized Policy Optimization

Abstract

Verifiable outcome rewards guide language-model post-training, but sequence-level advantages do not identify which token-level decisions should be preserved or revised. Evidence-conditioned Teachers provide denser supervision by replaying sampled trajectories with privileged feedback. Yet indiscriminate imitation risks transferring formatting or reasoning-style shifts that do not support task success. We introduce VERPO, a Verified Evidence Regularized Policy Optimization framework that treats evidence as a proposal for policy correction while retaining the outcome objective. It separates evidence-free reference restoration from signed token-level evidence corrections. Fisher Evidence Contrast attenuates corrections along an estimated evidence-presence direction. A stopped token-wise ZPD controller scales acceptance according to local reward alignment and Fisher movement cost, while the reference channel remains independent of acceptance. Across five scientific-reasoning and tool-use tasks, the best variant on each backbone exceeds the strongest compared baseline in average score. The averages rise from 0.6826 to 0.6857 on Qwen3-4B, from 0.6895 to 0.7058 on Qwen3-8B, and from 0.4751 to 0.5657 on Llama-3.2-1B.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Haijiang Li, Chengyu Lv, Yi Zhang, Zhibing Zhang, Rui Qian, Yuchen Zhang, Xiaofan Zhang, Mingshan Wang, Xiaofei Jing, Yu Tong, Cangqi Zhou. 2026-09-05. VERPO: Verified Evidence Regularized Policy Optimization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.06100

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

CyrillicQA: The Influence of Phonetically Encoded Secret Language on LLM Performance

Due to the selection of their training data, large language models (LLMs) perform best on standard-language inputs from languages using the Latin alphabet with large speaker populations, while disadvantaging other language varieties. Nevertheless, they can also be a versatile tool for preserving precisely such endangered languages. But do they also possess the necessary creativity and capacity for abstraction to decode phonetically encoded language the same way humans do?

cs.CL

KARMA: Knowledge graph-based Automated Reasoning Materialization and Alignment

Template-based contrastive synthesis is scalable, but its candidates often differ only in a few entity-slots while sequence-level optimization spreads supervision over mostly shared templates. We formalize this as the Resolution Mismatch Problem and propose KARMA, which enumerates schema-constrained paths over domain knowledge graphs and verbalizes them into slot-aligned contrastive candidates. Slot-Parallel Alignment (SPA) then applies a decoupled slot-level objective to route preference supervision to discriminative entity-slots, with slot-aware masked attention serving as an optional packed-evaluation implementation. Across biomedical, computer-science, and chemistry benchmarks, KARMA outperforms base LLM and same-data SFT baselines, and compares favorably with sequence- and token-level preference methods.

cs.CL

MOLE: Detecting Insider Threats in AI Agents

Model misalignment, prompt injection, or operator misuse could lead AI agents operating frontier-lab accounts to exfiltrate model weights, poison training data, or weaken release gates. Existing benchmarks do not test whether defenders can detect this activity among routine work under a limited review budget. We introduce MOLE, an open benchmark of 150 AI-operated accounts sharing 9 stateful services over 30 workdays, with 12 threats and 8 corpora from four models totaling roughly 20 billion tokens. Of 39 agent models, 72% complete most assigned harmful objectives and agent refusal does not predict completion. MOLE enables comparison of 40 monitors across corpus generators, observability levels, and threats; even the best evaluated monitor in our single-day audit-event comparison misses nearly half of completed harm. MOLE also enables monitor development: benchmark-guided search improves a mid-tier monitor by 49-64%, while selective use of a stronger monitor improves budget-AUC by 10% over applying it to every account-day at comparable modeled cost.

cs.LG