# Not All Negative Samples Are Equal: LLMs Learn Better from Plausible Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.03516 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.03516/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reinforcement learning for reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 21 of its 46 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reinforcement learning for reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reinforcement-learning-for-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.01652/) (2021)
- [DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14476/) (2025)
- [OpenAI o1 System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16720/) (2024)
- [Kimi k1.5: Scaling Reinforcement Learning with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12599/) (2025)
- [OlympiadBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Promoting AGI with Olympiad-Level Bilingual Multimodal Scientific Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14008/) (2024)
- [SimpleRL-Zoo: Investigating and Taming Zero Reinforcement Learning for Open Base Models in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.18892/) (2025)
- [Process Reinforcement through Implicit Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01456/) (2025)
- [Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06592/) (2024)
- [Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards Implicitly Incentivizes Correct Reasoning in Base LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.14245/) (2025)
- [A Minimalist Approach to LLM Reasoning: from Rejection Sampling to Reinforce](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.11343/) (2025)
- [Learning From Mistakes Makes LLM Better Reasoner](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.20689/) (2023)
- [Learning From Failure: Integrating Negative Examples when Fine-tuning Large Language Models as Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11651/) (2024)
- [Kardia-R1: Unleashing LLMs to Reason toward Understanding and Empathy for Emotional Support via Rubric-as-Judge Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.01282/) (2025)
- [How much do LLMs learn from negative examples?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14391/) (2025)
- [Learning from Mistakes: Negative Reasoning Samples Enhance Out-of-Domain Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04992/) (2026)
- [STARS: Synchronous Token Alignment for Robust Supervision in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.03827/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Learning from negative samples holds great promise for improving Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning capability, yet existing methods treat all incorrect responses as equally informative, overlooking the crucial role of sample quality. To address this, we propose Plausible Negative Samples (PNS), a method that synthesizes high-quality negative samples exhibiting expected format and structural coherence while ultimately yielding incorrect answers. PNS trains a dedicated model via reverse reinforcement learning (RL) guided by a composite reward combining format compliance, accuracy inversion, reward model assessment, and chain-of-thought evaluation, generating responses nearly indistinguishable from correct solutions. We further validate PNS as a plug-and-play data source for preference optimization across three backbone models on seven mathematical reasoning benchmarks. Results demonstrate that PNS consistently outperforms other negative sample synthesis methods, achieving an average improvement of 2.03% over RL-trained models.