mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Correct Answers from Sound Reasoning: Verifiable Process Supervision for Language Models

arXiv 2605.12519 ↗First posted 3 Apr 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 4

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reinforcement learning for reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Training language models to produce both correct answers and sound reasoning remains an open challenge. Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards typically optimizes only final outcomes, which can improve task accuracy at the expense of reasoning quality, producing inaccurate, incomplete, or inconsistent traces. We propose verifiable process supervision (VPS), a post-training framework that jointly optimizes prediction accuracy and reasoning quality by supervising structured intermediate claims. We first apply supervised fine-tuning to induce a structured reasoning format, enabling deterministic extraction and verification of intermediate claims for process-level rewards. To address the heterogeneous difficulty of reasoning subtasks, we introduce adaptive weighting that prioritizes components with the largest remaining errors, creating an implicit curriculum. We evaluate VPS on chess as a controlled testbed where reasoning steps can be deterministically verified against engine signals. While outcome-only RL improves move accuracy, it sharply degrades reasoning quality, increasing win-rate error by up to 112% and reducing internal consistency by up to 69%. In contrast, VPS preserves accuracy while significantly improving reasoning quality, reducing win-rate error by up to 30% and restoring consistency to near saturation. A reasoning-space analysis further shows that, without a structured prior, outcome-only RL converges to budget-dependent shortcuts rather than sound multi-step reasoning. Beyond chess, we observe the same phenomenon on math reasoning, where outcome-only RL improves accuracy while degrading step-level arithmetic and consistency, whereas VPS maintains both. These results show that VPS enables language models to reason both accurately and reliably in verifiable domains.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reinforcement learning for reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 15 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Apr 2026.

Builds on

15 of 32 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Learning to Generate Formally Verifiable Step-by-Step Logic Reasoning via Structured Formal Intermediaries31 Mar
  2. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning22 Jan
  3. 2024Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision5 Jun
  4. 2023Let's Verify Step by Step31 May
  5. 2022Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback25 Nov

Other references · 10

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
  3. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
  4. 2025Olmo 3cited by 129
  5. 2025DeepSeekMath-V2: Towards Self-Verifiable Mathematical Reasoningcited by 94
  6. 2020The Chess Transformer: Mastering Play using Generative Language Modelscited by 37
  7. 2025TextArenacited by 27
  8. 2024PokeLLMon: A Human-Parity Agent for Pokemon Battles with Large Language Modelscited by 26
  9. 2024Large Language Models as Minecraft Agentscited by 7
  10. 2026MEMO: Memory-Augmented Model Context Optimization for Robust Multi-Turn Multi-Agent LLM Gamescited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Beyond Outcome Verification: Verifiable Process Reward Models for Structured Reasoning
  2. 2026Verifiable Process Rewards for Agentic Reasoning
  3. 2025VerifyBench: A Systematic Benchmark for Evaluating Reasoning Verifiers Across Domains
  4. 2026Understanding Reasoning from Pretraining to Post-Training
  5. 2026Reasoning Arena: Trace Tournaments When Verifiable Rewards Fall Short
  6. 2026Proof-Carrying Cognition: Closing the Verification Gap with Reality-Settled Reward
  7. 2025Beyond Correctness: Harmonizing Process and Outcome Rewards through RL Training
  8. 2026How Reasoning Evolves from Post-Training Data: An Empirical Study Using Chess