Your Reasoning Model is Secretly a Reward Model - Optimization-Free Verification from Experience
Zhenwen Liang, Ruosen Li, Yujun Zhou, Linfeng Song, Dian Yu, Xinya Du, Haitao Mi, Dong Yu
Abstract
Assessing the quality of Large Language Model (LLM) outputs becomes especially challenging in high-branching settings, where a single prompt yields many plausible candidates. Existing verifiers typically operate on the surface text (e.g., reward models, LLM judges, majority voting) or on confidence proxies derived from token probabilities, both of which can be brittle: the former can be influenced by stylistic artifacts, while the latter is often miscalibrated. In this paper, we study a third source of information-the model's hidden states-for binary correctness verification in tasks with a reliable success/failure signal (e.g., deterministic checkers or reference-grounded answers). We find that correct and incorrect solutions exhibit measurable geometric differences in their hidden-state trajectories. To isolate this signal with minimal modeling assumptions, we introduce CLUE (Clustering and Experience-based Verification), a trainingfree, non-parametric verifier. CLUE summarizes each reasoning trace by an activation delta-the difference between hidden states at the start and end of the explicit reasoning spanand predicts correctness by comparing this delta to two class centroids computed from labeled experience. Across math (AIME 24/25), scientific QA (GPQA), and a multi-domain benchmark (WebInstruct-verified), CLUE improves selection and reranking, with particularly strong gains on smaller or less-calibrated models. For example, on AIME 24 with a 1.5B model, CLUE raises accuracy from 56.7% (majority@64) to 70.0% (top-maj@16).
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 2308ffdf-2cec-4f64-8811-d2fd72d521d4Builds on9
- Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language ModelsShunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,068 citations
- Let's Verify Step by StepHunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yuri Burda, Harrison Edwards et al.ICLR 2024 · 3,045 citations
- Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language ModelsXuezhi Wang, Jason Wei, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc V. Le et al.ICLR 2023 · 681 citations
- Dynamic Early Exit in Reasoning ModelsChenxu Yang, Qingyi Si, Yongjie Duan, Zheliang Zhu et al.ICLR 2026 · 250 citations
- In-context Vectors: Making In Context Learning More Effective and Controllable Through Latent Space SteeringSheng Liu, Haotian Ye, Lei Xing, James Y. ZouICML 2024 · 244 citations
Related papers
- Reinforcing General Reasoning Without VerifiersXiangxin Zhou, Zichen Liu, Anya Sims, Haonan Wang et al.ICLR 2026 · 75 citations
- Beyond Logits: Metastable Latent Dynamics for Sample-Efficient Best-of-N Selection in LLMsXinrong Li, Zidong Zhou, Keyu Shen, Wenhao Zhou et al.ICML 2026
- Spurious Rewards: Rethinking Training Signals in RLVRRulin Shao, Stella Li, Rui Xin, Scott Geng et al.ICML 2026
- Solve-Detect-Verify: Inference-Time Scaling with Flexible Generative VerifierJianyuan Zhong, Zeju Li, Zhijian Xu, Xiangyu Wen et al.ACL 2026 · 3 citations
- Incentivizing LLMs to Self-Verify Their AnswersFuxiang Zhang, Jiacheng Xu, Chaojie Wang, Ce Cui et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 20 citations
