跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+367新增论文
+288其中 AI 相关
+33已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-09 10:18 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-09 10:17各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-08 11:13 — 2026-11-09 11:13(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-09 10:18最近发现新增版本:2026-11-09 10:17库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 12:44

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

17,467 已收录论文14,949 AI 相关4,222 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-09 10:16(北京时间)
版本更新 · v3arXiv:2608.08802

Improving Generalization Robustness of Multimodal RLVR

Pengfei Zhou, Zhiwei Tang, Chenrui Zhou, Lama Moukheiber, Yixing Ma, Bin Xu, Jiajun Song, Zhenglin Wan 等 13 位作者

原文摘要

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) makes Multimodal Large Language Models more accurate, but the gains are brittle: simply paraphrasing a question or changing the prompt template can degrade them, which challenges reliable deployment in high-stakes scenarios like medical VQA. We trace this to two issues of the standard RL objective. First, the binary verifier conflates format with content, so the reward signal cannot tell a wrong answer apart from a misformatted one. Second, the training distribution covers only a thin slice of the real-world prompts that the model might meet at deployment, so policies that perform well on the training distribution can behave differently under unseen prompts during test. Both failures call for a robust post-training method that helps the policy cover a broader distribution of semantically equivalent prompts, and we identify two measures that help achieve this objective: separating format from semantics in the reward, and applying policy invariance across perturbed prompts with equivalent semantics. We therefore propose Prompt-Invariant RLVR (PIRL), consisting of a dynamic trinary reward and a consistency regularizer based on an embedding-space adversary. Under stress testing, PIRL's average accuracy on benchmarks drops by only $\le 1\%$, where GRPO drops ~3%. On dynamic evaluation, PIRL also achieves the smallest performance drop.

cs.AI