论文库

原文摘要

Verifiers--functions assigning rewards to agent behavior--have been key to AI progress in math, code, and games. However, extending gains to domains without clear-cut success criteria (e.g., computer use) remains a challenge: while humans can recognize desired outcomes, translating this intuition into scalable rules is nontrivial. Multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) offer a promising solution, given their world knowledge, human-preference alignment, and reasoning skills. We evaluate MLLM verifiers across web navigation, computer use, and robotics, spanning 13 models, 28 judge designs, diverse agent trajectories, and distinct downstream applications. We identify a critical limitation: a strong tendency for MLLMs to over-validate agent behavior, a phenomenon we term agreement bias. This bias is pervasive across models, is resilient to test-time scaling, and harms pipelines relying on MLLM judgments (e.g., self-improvement). We discuss principles for design and evaluation of verifiers, and introduce SGV, a method that improves verification by harnessing MLLMs' own capabilities via modulation of (un)conditional generation. First, an MLLM generates broad priors about desired behavior, independent of the data under evaluation. Then, conditioned on generated priors, it reasons over and judges a candidate trajectory. Our methods yield more human-aligned verifiers, with gains of up to 25pp in failure detection, 14pp in accuracy, and benefits extending to downstream applications. In self-improvement and online supervision, our verifiers boost task completion of a GUI specialist in OSWorld, a diffusion policy in robomimic, and a ReAct agent in VisualWebArena--surpassing the previous SOTA by 20pp. Finally, we release an updated version of VisualWebArena, featuring improved evaluators, high-fidelity environment parallelism with >10x speedups, and VWA-Lite, a 1/3-scale subset with comparable evaluation fidelity.