Budget-aware Test-time Scaling via Discriminative Verification
On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking
Abstract (arXiv)
Test-time scaling is a powerful strategy for boosting the performance of large language models on complex reasoning tasks. While state-of-the-art approaches often employ generative verifiers to select the best solution from a pool of candidates, this method incurs prohibitive computational costs, limiting its practicality. In this work, we shift the focus to a more budget-aware paradigm: discriminative verification. We conduct a thorough empirical analysis and demonstrate that while discriminative verifiers may underperform in isolation, combining them with self-consistency in a hybrid approach creates a powerful and efficient test-time scaling mechanism. Notably, under a fixed compute budget, this hybrid approach surpasses state-of-the-art generative verification by a significant margin: achieving up to 15.3% higher accuracy on AIME2025. Our findings establish that for practical, real-world applications, budget-aware scaling with discriminative verifiers is not only a "free" upgrade over self-consistency, but also a more effective and efficient alternative to costly generative techniques. Code is available at https://github.com/wang-research-lab/verification.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 36 of its 64 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Oct 2025.
Builds on
36 of 64 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2025When To Solve, When To Verify: Compute-Optimal Problem Solving and Generative Verification for LLM Reasoning1 Apr
- 2025Sample, Scrutinize and Scale: Effective Inference-Time Search by Scaling Verification3 Feb
- 2025s1: Simple test-time scaling31 Jan
- 2024Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters6 Aug
- 2024V-STaR: Training Verifiers for Self-Taught Reasoners9 Feb
Other references · 31
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,713
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,748
- 2019Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferencescited by 2,124
- 2024Qwen2.5-Math Technical Report: Toward Mathematical Expert Model via Self-Improvementcited by 1,057
- 2024Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Samplingcited by 946
- 2023Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotationscited by 895
- 2022Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedbackcited by 871
- 2025LIMO: Less is More for Reasoningcited by 488
19 more
- 2024From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipelinecited by 484
- 2024Generative Verifiers: Reward Modeling as Next-Token Predictioncited by 465
- 2024WildGuard: Open One-Stop Moderation Tools for Safety Risks, Jailbreaks, and Refusals of LLMscited by 460
- 2024Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Modelscited by 431
- 2024Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervisioncited by 426
- 2022Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluatorscited by 372
- 2023JudgeLM: Fine-tuned Large Language Models are Scalable Judgescited by 351
- 2023PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimizationcited by 311
- 2025rStar-Math: Small LLMs Can Master Math Reasoning with Self-Evolved Deep Thinkingcited by 308
- 2024JudgeBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Judgescited by 294
- 2024Rewarding Progress: Scaling Automated Process Verifiers for LLM Reasoningcited by 267
- 2024LiveBench: A Challenging, Contamination-Limited LLM Benchmarkcited by 242
- 2024HelpSteer2: Open-source dataset for training top-performing reward modelscited by 232
- 2023Generative Judge for Evaluating Alignmentcited by 163
- 2024Generative Reward Modelscited by 148
- 2024From Decoding to Meta-Generation: Inference-time Algorithms for Large Language Modelscited by 136
- 2024Prover-Verifier Games improve legibility of LLM outputscited by 79
- 2025Learning to Plan & Reason for Evaluation with Thinking-LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 75
- 2025Heimdall: test-time scaling on the generative verificationcited by 26
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Trust but Verify! A Survey on Verification Design for Test-time Scaling
- 2025Step-level Verifier-guided Hybrid Test-Time Scaling for Large Language Models
- 2025Variation in Verification: Understanding Verification Dynamics in Large Language Models
- 2025The Art of Scaling Test-Time Compute for Large Language Models
- 2025Revisiting Test-Time Scaling: A Survey and a Diversity-Aware Method for Efficient Reasoning
- 2025Are We Scaling the Right Thing? A System Perspective on Test-Time Scaling
- 2026ThinkBooster: A Unified Framework for Seamless Test-Time Scaling of LLM Reasoning
- 2025Limits and Gains of Test-Time Scaling in Vision-Language Reasoning