Closing the Reflection Gap: A Free Calibration Bonus for Agentic RL
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
LLMs are increasingly deployed as agents that interact with external environments and observe feedback such as execution results, error messages, and tool outputs. A well-functioning agent should be able to leverage this feedback to accurately assess its own performance. Yet we find a persistent reflection gap: LLM agents tend to mis-assess their own outputs after observing concrete environment feedback -- even for questions they correctly answered -- and standard RL barely helps due to a credit-assignment mismatch. To close this gap, we propose RefGRPO, a simple yet effective fix that augments standard RL algorithms with two key ingredients: a free calibration bonus computed by contrasting the agent's own reflection with the actual outcome (requiring no additional reward model, LLM judge, or external annotation), and a dynamic schedule on its coefficient. Compared to standard RL baselines, our method simultaneously improves reflection calibration (e.g., reduces underconfidence rate 44.4% → 7.7%) and task accuracy (e.g., 75.1% → 76.5%) on text-to-SQL across five benchmarks. The resulting calibrated reflection turns the agent into its own verifier grounded in environment feedback, which further enables (i) better self-improvement that uses reflections as pseudo-rewards without outcome supervision, and (ii) more effective test-time selective prediction by committing only to rollouts flagged as correct.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 48 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Jun 2026.
Builds on
48 of 53 references.
References · 48
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,278
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,856
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,592
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,486
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,916
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,091
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,902
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,156
- 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,714
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,367
- 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 3,011
- 2025DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scalecited by 2,729
36 more
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,823
- 2018World Modelscited by 1,481
- 2025Search-R1: Training LLMs to Reason and Leverage Search Engines with Reinforcement Learningcited by 1,399
- 2025Understanding R1-Zero-Like Training: A Critical Perspectivecited by 1,304
- 2024Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Reportcited by 1,179
- 2018Spider: A Large-Scale Human-Labeled Dataset for Complex and Cross-Domain Semantic Parsing and Text-to-SQL Taskcited by 1,133
- 2023Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yetcited by 983
- 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 960
- 2025Group Sequence Policy Optimizationcited by 806
- 2023Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedbackcited by 800
- 2023CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquingcited by 764
- 2023Can LLM Already Serve as A Database Interface? A BIg Bench for Large-Scale Database Grounded Text-to-SQLscited by 680
- 2024Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learningcited by 413
- 2025RAGEN: Understanding Self-Evolution in LLM Agents via Multi-Turn Reinforcement Learningcited by 367
- 2025TTRL: Test-Time Reinforcement Learningcited by 262
- 2025The Landscape of Agentic Reinforcement Learning for LLMs: A Surveycited by 200
- 2020Structure-Grounded Pretraining for Text-to-SQLcited by 126
- 2025Beyond Binary Rewards: Training LMs to Reason About Their Uncertaintycited by 112
- 2024Taming Overconfidence in LLMs: Reward Calibration in RLHFcited by 108
- 2021Exploring Underexplored Limitations of Cross-Domain Text-to-SQL Generalizationcited by 92
- 2025OmniSQL: Synthesizing High-quality Text-to-SQL Data at Scalecited by 91
- 2025Reinforcing Multi-Turn Reasoning in LLM Agents via Fine-Grained Reward Structure and Credit Assignmentcited by 78
- 2025SQL-R1: Training Natural Language to SQL Reasoning Model By Reinforcement Learningcited by 67
- 2025JustRL: Scaling a 1.5B LLM with a Simple RL Recipecited by 61
- 2025Reasoning-SQL: Reinforcement Learning with SQL Tailored Partial Rewards for Reasoning-Enhanced Text-to-SQLcited by 59
- 2025Rewarding Doubt: A Reinforcement Learning Approach to Calibrated Confidence Expression of Large Language Modelscited by 50
- 2026Endless Terminals: Scaling RL Environments for Terminal Agentscited by 47
- 2024A Preview of XiYan-SQL: A Multi-Generator Ensemble Framework for Text-to-SQLcited by 46
- 2025SkyRL-Agent: Efficient RL Training for Multi-turn LLM Agentcited by 46
- 2024When to Trust LLMs: Aligning Confidence with Response Qualitycited by 42
- 2025S2R: Teaching LLMs to Self-verify and Self-correct via Reinforcement Learningcited by 38
- 2022Efficient Active Learning with Abstentioncited by 22
- 2019Fast classification rates without standard margin assumptionscited by 16
- 2026ECHO: Terminal Agents Learn World Models for Freecited by 14
- 2022Active Learning with Neural Networks: Insights from Nonparametric Statisticscited by 13
- 2025Test-Time Matching: Unlocking Compositional Reasoning in Multimodal Modelscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026MetaResearcher: Scaling Deep Research via Self-Reflective Reinforcement Learning in Adversarial Virtual Environmentscited by 1
- 2026Training-Free Inference-Time Self-Reflection and Cost-Bounded Early Stopping for Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Uncertainty Quantification for LLM Agents: A Taxonomy, an Evaluation Protocol, and an Empirical Studycited by 0
- 2026Uncertainty Quantification for LLM Agents: A Taxonomy, an Evaluation Protocol, and an Empirical Study7 Sep 2026
- 2026Training-Free Inference-Time Self-Reflection and Cost-Bounded Early Stopping for Large Language Models19 Aug 2026
- 2026MetaResearcher: Scaling Deep Research via Self-Reflective Reinforcement Learning in Adversarial Virtual Environments18 Jun 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Reinforced Agent: Inference-Time Feedback for Tool-Calling Agents
- 2026Agent^2 RL-Bench: Can LLM Agents Engineer Agentic RL Post-Training?
- 2026Agentic CLEAR: Automating Multi-Level Evaluation of LLM Agents
- 2026The Confidence Dichotomy: Analyzing and Mitigating Miscalibration in Tool-Use Agents
- 2026Structured Feedback Improves Repair in an LLM Agent Loop
- 2024AgentQuest: A Modular Benchmark Framework to Measure Progress and Improve LLM Agents
- 2026VeriHarness: Scaling Agentic Verification for Long-Horizon Tasks
- 2026AgentJudgeBench: A Multi-Difficulty Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Judges on Agentic Tool-Calling