# SEVA: Self-Evolving Verification Agent with Process Reward for Fact Attribution

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.29713 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.29713/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 18 of its 20 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 Jun 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)
- Synthetic data and self-improvement for LLMs / [Self-evolving LLM agents](https://mlsanity.com/synth/self-evolving-llm-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [HybridFlow: A Flexible and Efficient RLHF Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.19256/) (2024)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.02243/) (2019)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.14599/) (2019)
- [Quantifying the Carbon Emissions of Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.09700/) (2019)
- [AlignScore: Evaluating Factual Consistency with a Unified Alignment Function](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16739/) (2023)
- [RARR: Researching and Revising What Language Models Say, Using Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.08726/) (2022)
- [MiniCheck: Efficient Fact-Checking of LLMs on Grounding Documents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.10774/) (2024)
- [Fine-tuning Language Models for Factuality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08401/) (2023)
- [RL Tango: Reinforcing Generator and Verifier Together for Language Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.15034/) (2025)
- [Verifying the Verifiers: Unveiling Pitfalls and Potentials in Fact Verifiers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.13342/) (2025)
- [MARCH: Multi-Agent Reinforced Self-Check for LLM Hallucination](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.24579/) (2026)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.07663/) (2026)
- [Uncertainty Quantification for LLM Agents: A Taxonomy, an Evaluation Protocol, and an Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.07395/) (2026)
- [VeriHarness: Scaling Agentic Verification for Long-Horizon Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.00972/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Hallucination is the reliability bottleneck for LLM-based agents, and fact attribution verifiers are the last line of defense -- yet today's verifiers emit only opaque binary labels, leaving agents unable to self-correct and operators unable to audit. We present SEVA, a structured verification agent that emits evidence alignments, step-by-step reasoning chains, calibrated confidence, and a six-category error diagnosis with actionable fixes. Training such an agent with RL is non-trivial: standard binary reward on multi-component output triggers advantage collapse -- within-group reward variance vanishes and the GRPO gradient disappears. We resolve this with a process reward that decomposes verification quality into five independent components weighted 70/30 toward process signals, restoring the gradient and inducing an implicit curriculum -- the agent first masters verification behavior (alignment 0.917 -> 0.997, format 72% -> 100%), then outcomes (F1 64.9 -> 69.0). Structured output further enables a Verify -> Reflect -> Probe -> Refine self-evolution loop, which over four rounds on a 7B model surfaces an unexpected structural finding: each round produces a benchmark-specialist, not a generalist (+15 pp on HaluEval, -10 to -14 pp on TruthfulQA in the same model, persistent at 4x data). On ClearFacts, SEVA-3B matches GPT-4o-mini (69.0 vs. 69.8 F1) while producing substantially richer, auditable output -- confirming a principle that should generalize: for any RL task with multi-component generation, reward granularity must match output granularity.