mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Judging in Latent Space: Efficient Generative Reward Modeling via Semantics-Preserving Compression

arXiv 2610.09788 ↗First posted 7 Oct 2026cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Process reward models for reasoning also fits: Reward modeling and RLHF

Abstract (arXiv)

Reward modeling often requires jointly representing and reasoning over multiple evaluation criteria, yet verbalizing this process token by token can incur substantial inference cost. Recent work on latent reasoning suggests that continuous states may support this computation more compactly. We introduce LatentGRM, a latent evaluation framework built on semantic chunking, compression, and reconstruction. By using the structure of rubric-guided evaluations to guide compression, LatentGRM learns compact continuous trajectories that support autonomous pairwise judgments without generating textual assessments. A separate interpreter reconstructs evaluation text from these trajectories, providing an offline view of the information retained under compression. Under matched training data and backbones, LatentGRM achieves competitive aggregate preference accuracy relative to explicit Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) judges at both 4B and 8B scales. Across four benchmark domains, LatentGRM-8B compresses evaluation trajectories by 8.9--9.2x and reduces total judge inference time by 6.1--7.0x at vote@5. Controlled rubric interventions show that criterion-dependent preference information is carried through the latent sequence. Together, these results demonstrate that continuous latent evaluation can substantially reduce inference cost while preserving competitive judgment quality.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Process reward models for reasoning, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 9 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2026.

Builds on

9 of 31 references.

References · 9

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  2. 2026GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineeringcited by 502
  3. 2024How to use and interpret activation patchingcited by 191
  4. 2024Generative Reward Modelscited by 148
  5. 2024Critique-out-Loud Reward Modelscited by 105
  6. 2025JudgeLRM: Large Reasoning Models as a Judgecited by 76
  7. 2025LLM Latent Reasoning as Chain of Superpositioncited by 37
  8. 2026DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash: Pushing the Limits of KV Cache Compressioncited by 34
  9. 2026Latent-GRPO: Group Relative Policy Optimization for Latent Reasoningcited by 10

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Latent Reward Steering: An Adaptive Inference-Time Framework that Implicitly Promotes Cognitive Behaviors in Reasoning LLMs
  2. 2024Beyond Scalar Reward Model: Learning Generative Judge from Preference Data
  3. 2026AdaJudge: Adaptive Multi-Perspective Judging for Reward Modeling
  4. 2025Limited Preference Data? Learning Better Reward Model with Latent Space Synthesis
  5. 2025S2J: Bridging the Gap Between Solving and Judging Ability in Generative Reward Models
  6. 2025ReasonGRM: Enhancing Generative Reward Models through Large Reasoning Models
  7. 2026EnGRICH: Enhancing Generative Reward Modeling with Critiques from Humans
  8. 2025Improving LLM-as-a-Judge Inference with the Judgment Distribution