Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

HFEPX · Eval paper review

REVES: REvision and VErification--Augmented Training for Test-Time Scaling

Yuanxin Liu, Ruida Zhou, Xinyan Zhao, Amr Sharaf +5 more

Published

Jun 17, 2026

Citations

0

Trust level

Provisional

Usefulness score

Unavailable

Extraction confidence

0% (Provisional)

Derived from abstract and metadata only.

Signals refreshed

Jun 17, 2026

Should you rely on this paper?

Signal extraction is still processing. This page currently shows metadata-first guidance until structured protocol fields are ready.

This page is a lightweight research summary built from the abstract and metadata while deeper extraction catches up.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A provisional background reference while structured extraction finishes.

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Main weakness

This page is still relying on abstract and metadata signals, not a fuller protocol read.

Human feedback signal
Not explicit
Not explicit in abstract metadata
Evaluation signal
Weak or implicit
Validate from full paper
Usefulness for eval research
Unavailable
Provisional (processing)

Eval-fit score is unavailable until extraction completes.

Abstract

Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning. However, standard post-training methods primarily optimize single-shot objectives, creating a fundamental misalignment with multi-step inference dynamics. While recent work treats this as multi-turn reinforcement learning (RL), conventional approaches optimize over the multi-step trajectories directly, failing to further exploit the high-quality mistakes in intermediate steps that model can learn from correcting them. We propose a two-stage iterative framework that alternates between online data/prompt augmentation and policy optimization. By converting the intermediate steps (``near-miss'' answers) in the successful recovery trajectories into decoupled revision and verification prompts, our approach concentrates training on both effective answer transformation and error identification. This approach enables efficient off-policy data generation and reduces the computational overhead of long-horizon sampling compared to standard multi-turn RL. On LiveCodeBench, using publicly available test cases as feedback, we observe gains of +6.5 points over the RL baseline and +4.0 points over standard multi-turn training. Beyond coding, our approach matches the previously reported SOTA result on circle packing while using the smallest base model (4B) and far fewer rollouts than the much larger evolutionary search systems. Math results under ground-truth verification further confirm improved correction ability. It also generalizes to out-of-distribution constraint-satisfaction puzzles such as n\_queens and mini\_sudoku, where correctness is defined entirely by problem constraints. Code is available at https://github.com/yxliu02/REVES.git.

What we could verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

provisional (inferred)

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning."

Evaluation Modes

provisional (inferred)

Long Horizon tasks

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning."

Quality Controls

provisional (inferred)

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning."

Benchmarks / Datasets

provisional (inferred)

LiveCodeBench

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

"On LiveCodeBench, using publicly available test cases as feedback, we observe gains of +6.5 points over the RL baseline and +4.0 points over standard multi-turn training."

Reported Metrics

provisional (inferred)

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning."

Rater Population

provisional (inferred)

Unknown

Rater source not explicitly reported.

"Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning."

Human feedback details

This page is using abstract-level cues only right now. Treat the signals below as provisional.

  • Potential human-data signal: No explicit human-data keywords detected.
  • Potential benchmark anchors: LiveCodeBench
  • Abstract highlights: 3 key sentence(s) extracted below.
Evaluation details

Evaluation fields are inferred from the abstract only.

  • Potential evaluation modes: Long-horizon tasks
  • Potential metric signals: No metric keywords detected.
  • Confidence: Provisional (metadata-only fallback).

Research brief

Metadata summary

Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key takeaways

  • Test-time scaling via sequential revision has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning.
  • However, standard post-training methods primarily optimize single-shot objectives, creating a fundamental misalignment with multi-step inference dynamics.
  • While recent work treats this as multi-turn reinforcement learning (RL), conventional approaches optimize over the multi-step trajectories directly, failing to further exploit the high-quality mistakes in intermediate steps that model can learn from correcting them.

Researcher actions

  • Compare this paper against others mentioning LiveCodeBench.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Long-horizon tasks) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended queries