Organizations: Faculty of Computing, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China · School of Intelligence Science and Technology, Nanjing University, Suzhou, China · School of Computer Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technolgy, Shenzhen, China
The widespread adoption of reinforcement learning-based alignment highlights the growing importance of reward models. Various benchmarks have been built to evaluate reward models in various domains and scenarios. However, a significant gap remains in assessing reward models for long-form generation, despite its critical role in real-world applications. To bridge this, we introduce Long-form RewardBench, the first reward modeling testbed specifically designed for long-form generation. Our benchmark encompasses five key subtasks: QA, RAG, Chat, Writing, and Reasoning. We collected instruction and preference data through a meticulously designed multi-stage data collection process, and conducted extensive experiments on 20+ mainstream reward models, including both classifiers and generative models. Our findings reveal that current models still lack long-form reward modeling capabilities. Furthermore, we designed a novel Long-form Needle-in-a-Haystack Test, which revealed a correlation between reward modeling performance and the error's position within a response, as well as the overall response length, with distinct characteristics observed between classification and generative models. Finally, we demonstrate that classifiers exhibit better generalizability compared to generative models trained on the same data. As the first benchmark for long-form reward modeling, this work aims to offer a robust platform for visualizing progress in this crucial area.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The data construction process of Long-form RewardBench and Long-form Needle-in-a-Haystack Test.
Subset
Num
Response
Avg.Len
Min.Len
Max. Len
QA
227
Chosen
1463
327
4129
Rejected
1013
258
3075
RAG
239
Chosen
995
200
3332
Rejected
640
200
6053
Chat
332
Chosen
2286
569
8387
Rejected
1719
200
32723
Table 1: Statistics of responses in different subsets.
Figure 2: Response length distribution of chosen and rejected responses on Long-form RewardBench.
Figure 3: Model distribution for chosen and rejected responses on Long-form RewardBench.
Long-form-RM
RB2
RB1
Model
Type
Score
QA
RAG
Chat
Writing
Reasoning
Score
Score
Skywork/Skywork-Reward-V2-Llama-3.2-3B
Classifier
74.9
87.5
57.3
72.8
78.6
78.7
74.9
-
openai/gpt-4.1-2025-04-14
Generative
74.6
58.0
70.6
80.5
78.1
78.4
72.3
-
anthropic/claude-opus-4-20250514
Generative
74.4
57.1
71.9
75.4
79.4
80.1
76.5
-
allenai/Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct-RM-RB2
Classifier
74.4
59.7
77.5
78.3
81.6
72.3
76.1
90.2
allenai/Llama-3.1-Tulu-3-70B-SFT-RM-RB2
Classifier
73.9
59.7
74.0
81.2
83.1
69.2
72.2
88.9
Table 2: Top performing models on Long-form RewardBench, categorized into two types: classifier ( ) and generative ( ). We also present their performance on RewardBench2 (RB2) and RewardBench1 (RB1) as extra reference.
Model
Type
Score
Invalid
RISE-Judge-Qwen2.5-32B
Scoring
37.1
46.7%
Selection
51.6
23.3%
Selene-1-Mini-Llama-3.1-8B
Scoring
25.6
71.2%
Selection
57.3
7.9%
Skywork-Critic-Llama-3.1-8B
Scoring
24.3
73.9%
Selection
25.1
68.8%
Table 3: Fine-tuned generative models used for BoN sampling. We report both the overall score and the percentage of invalid responses on the four BoN sampling subsets.
Model
Type
Long-form RewardBench
Score
QA
RAG
Chat
Writing
Reasoning
google/gemini-2.5-flash-preview-04-17
Scoring
40.8
20.3
19.3
41.3
36.9
64.9
Selection
73.6
58.0
60.4
72.5
72.2
90.2
anthropic/claude-opus-4-20250514
Scoring
58.9
66.4
71.8
82.5
80.0
66.4
Selection
74.4
57.1
71.9
75.4
79.4
80.1
openai/gpt-4o-2024-08-06
Scoring
41.1
14.2
25.1
40.6
40.3
64.0
Table 4: Comparison of generative models in Selection or Scoring modes.
Figure 4: Needle-in-a-haystack test of two representative reward models on Factuality and Safety.
Figure 5: RM accuracy with different training data lengths.
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications · National Key Laboratory for Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University, China · School of Artificial Intelligence, Nanjing University, China
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Data Science, College of Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, Fudan University · 2Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory