Improving LLM-Generated Process Model Quality Through Reinforcement Learning: The Role of Reward Function Design
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) can generate BPMN process models from natural-language descriptions, yet supervised fine-tuning (SFT) limits their output quality to the patterns present in the training data. Reinforcement learning (RL) can optimize beyond this ceiling using external quality measures, but how the reward function should be designed when quality is multi-dimensional remains unexplored. We present a systematic investigation of reward function design for RL-based process model generation, training two LLM families (Llama~3.1 8B, Qwen~2.5 14B) under 48 configurations using Group Sequence Policy Optimization with rewards derived from an automated evaluation framework comprising 38 metrics across syntactic, pragmatic, and semantic quality. Three findings emerge. First, RL significantly improves pragmatic and syntactic quality while preserving semantic fidelity, reducing output variability by more than sixfold. Second, equal reward weighting consistently outperforms targeted weighting: emphasizing a specific dimension fails to improve it and can collapse the model into a low-quality mode. Third, design choices interact with model architecture in non-trivial ways: the invalidity penalty is essential for one model but irrelevant for the other, and SFT initialization is indispensable for one architecture but counterproductive for another. These results demonstrate that reward composition is a primary determinant of optimization outcomes, with effects as large as the decision to apply RL itself. The findings generalize to any structured generation task where quality is assessed along multiple automated dimensions. We release our implementation and experimental code at https://github.com/chlauer99/RL_for_process_modeling.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2026.
Builds on
12 of 43 references.
References · 12
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
- 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,582
- 2025Group Sequence Policy Optimizationcited by 788
- 2022CodeRL: Mastering Code Generation through Pretrained Models and Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 342
- 2024KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimizationcited by 256
- 2021A Practical Guide to Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning and Planningcited by 240
- 2025What is the Best Process Model Representation? A Comparative Analysis for Process Modeling with Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2025RL-Struct: A Lightweight Reinforcement Learning Framework for Reliable Structured Output in LLMscited by 1
- 2026Human-Centered Evaluation of an LLM-Based Process Modeling Copilot: A Mixed-Methods Study with Domain Expertscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.