Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Critique-Coder: Enhancing Coder Models by Critique Reinforcement Learning

Chi Ruan, Dongfu Jiang, Yubo Wang, Wenhu Chen · Sep 26, 2025 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Moderate trust

Use this for comparison and orientation, not as your only source.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

Moderate

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a popular training paradigm, particularly when paired with reasoning models. While effective, it primarily focuses on generating responses and lacks mechanisms to explicitly foster critique or reflection. Several recent studies, like Critique-Fine-Tuning (CFT) and Critique-Guided-Distillation (CGD) have shown the benefits of explicitly teaching LLMs how to critique. Motivated by them, we propose Critique Reinforcement Learning (CRL), where the model is tasked with generating a critique for a given (question, solution) pair. The reward is determined solely by whether the final judgment label $c \in \{\texttt{True}, \texttt{False}\}$ of the generated critique aligns with the ground-truth judgment $c^*$. Building on this point, we introduce Critique-Coder, which is trained on a hybrid of RL and CRL by substituting 20% of the standard RL data with CRL data. We fine-tune multiple models (Critique-Coder) and evaluate them on different benchmarks to show their advantages over RL-only models. We show that Critique-Coder consistently outperforms RL-only baselines on all the evaluated benchmarks. Notably, our Critique-Coder-8B can reach over 60% on LiveCodeBench (v5), outperforming other reasoning models like DeepCoder-14B and GPT-o1. Beyond code generation, Critique-Coder also demonstrates enhanced general reasoning abilities, as evidenced by its better performance on logic reasoning tasks from the BBEH dataset. This indicates that the application of CRL on coding datasets enhances general reasoning and critique abilities, which are transferable across a broad range of tasks. Hence, we believe that CRL works as a great complement to standard RL for LLM reasoning.

Low-signal caution for protocol decisions

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

  • The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper has useful evaluation signal, but protocol completeness is partial; pair it with related papers before deciding implementation strategy.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.

Trust level

Moderate

Usefulness score

50/100 • Medium

Useful as a secondary reference; validate protocol details against neighboring papers.

Human Feedback Signal

Detected

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Moderate-confidence candidate

Extraction confidence 55%

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

strong

Critique Edit

Directly usable for protocol triage.

"Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a popular training paradigm, particularly when paired with reasoning models."

Evaluation Modes

missing

None explicit

Validate eval design from full paper text.

"Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a popular training paradigm, particularly when paired with reasoning models."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a popular training paradigm, particularly when paired with reasoning models."

Benchmarks / Datasets

strong

LiveCodeBench

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

"Notably, our Critique-Coder-8B can reach over 60% on LiveCodeBench (v5), outperforming other reasoning models like DeepCoder-14B and GPT-o1."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a popular training paradigm, particularly when paired with reasoning models."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: Yes
  • Feedback types: Critique Edit
  • Rater population: Not reported
  • Expertise required: Coding

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes:
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Moderate
  • Use this page as: Secondary protocol comparison source

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

LiveCodeBench

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a popular training paradigm, particularly when paired with reasoning models.

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

Key Takeaways

  • Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a popular training paradigm, particularly when paired with reasoning models.
  • While effective, it primarily focuses on generating responses and lacks mechanisms to explicitly foster critique or reflection.
  • Several recent studies, like Critique-Fine-Tuning (CFT) and Critique-Guided-Distillation (CGD) have shown the benefits of explicitly teaching LLMs how to critique.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against others mentioning LiveCodeBench.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • 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

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Motivated by them, we propose Critique Reinforcement Learning (CRL), where the model is tasked with generating a critique for a given (question, solution) pair.
  • Building on this point, we introduce Critique-Coder, which is trained on a hybrid of RL and CRL by substituting 20% of the standard RL data with CRL data.
  • We show that Critique-Coder consistently outperforms RL-only baselines on all the evaluated benchmarks.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • We fine-tune multiple models (Critique-Coder) and evaluate them on different benchmarks to show their advantages over RL-only models.
  • We show that Critique-Coder consistently outperforms RL-only baselines on all the evaluated benchmarks.

Researcher Checklist

  • Pass: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Critique Edit

  • Gap: Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Pass: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    Detected: LiveCodeBench

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.