Reinforcement learning (RL) has become one of the primary paradigms for reasoning enhancement of large language models (LLMs). In particular, Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) and related algorithms have demonstrated strong performance with outcome-level rewards. However, these methods depend solely on the final answer, without feedback regarding which intermediate steps contribute to success or failure. As task complexity and reasoning trajectory length increase, such sparse final-answer rewards become increasingly insufficient. To address this limitation, we introduce ConsensusBench, a novel dataset designed to provide rule-based process-level signals. We posit that a correct final answer relies on a small set of intermediate conclusions throughout the reasoning process, which can be seen as a verifiable sub-outcome. We identify these sub-outcomes by filtering correct trajectories from N rollouts and clustering semantically equivalent intermediate statements. We call these clustered statements as Consensus Nodes. By integrating a rule-based process reward derived from these nodes into GRPO-style algorithms, we develop a new reinforcement learning signal named ConsensusPR. It directly reduces the reward sparsity of outcome reward across long reasoning trajectories. To facilitate systematic process-level evaluation, we introduce three metrics to our benchmark: Final Answer Accuracy (Acc), Node Coverage Rate (NCR), and Tokens per Node (TPN). Experiments across AIME 2024, AIME 2025, GSM8K, MATH-500, and our ConsensusBench demonstrate that the proposed method consistently surpasses GRPO-style approaches, highlighting the practical value of consensus nodes in guiding reasoning.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: A case study of four main types of mismatch in outcome-only reward. The green spans in the responses indicate the correct reasoning content, while the red ones in the responses indicate the incorrect content.
Source
#Problems
Avg. N(k)
MATH-500
441
5.36
GSM8K
1212
4.53
AIME-2024
30
8.50
AIME-2025
24
7.88
DAPO-MATH-17K
3870
7.64
Total (Test)
1707
4.88
Table 1: Composition and statistics of ConsensusBench .
Model
DNCR
AUROC
AUCPR
Gemini-2.5-pro
30.5
76.9
96.61
MiniMax-M2
33.9
74.1
96.65
GPT-5.2
18.0
65.5
96.58
DeepSeek-V4-pro
16.7
63.0
96.38
Table 2: Consistency metrics between Acc and NCR across models
AIME 24
AIME 25
GSM8K
MATH-500
ConsensusBench
Method
Acc@16
Acc@16
Acc@1
Acc@1
Acc
NCR
Qwen3-4B-Base
Vanilla GRPO
23.3
16.7
92.1
54.4
83.0
75.5
+ ConsensusPRlinear
33.3
20.0
92.8
59.0
84.7
76.8
+ ConsensusPRmax
36.7
23.3
92.6
59.2
84.5
77.4
+ ConsensusPRCL
33.3
26.7
83.0
62.4
78.2
76.5
Table 3: Main results across reasoning benchmarks (pass@1, pass@16, NCR, %). Bold denotes best, underline denotes second best. All models initialized from the same base checkpoints.
Qwen3-4B-Base
Qwen3-8B-Base
Methods
TPN
TPN
vanilla GRPO
433.95
1527.35
+ linear
744.13
1786.49
+ max
564.43
1792.43
+ CL
562.92
1529.14
vanilla DAPO
320.47
1349.12
Table 4: Tokens per node (TPN) scores across models.
Methods
Easy
Medium
Hard
Acc
DAPO
76.7
62.8
41.8
+ linear
76.7(+0.0%)
64.4(+2.5%)
46.3(+10.8%)
+ max
79.1(+1.3%)
64.1(+2.1%)
42.5(+1.7%)
+ CL
83.7(+9.1%)
71.5(+13.8%)
49.3(+17.9%)
Response Length
Table 5: Difficulty Analysis on Qwen3-4B-Base.
Figure 2: Performance curves of Qwen3-4B-Base across metrics when trained with different values of the hyperparameter α . More detailed data are provided in Appendix D.3 .
AIME 24
AIME 25
GSM8K
MATH-500
ConsensusBench
Method
Acc@16
Acc@16
Acc@1
Acc@1
Acc
NCR
TPN
Qwen3-1.7B-Base
Vanilla GRPO
10.0
6.67
81.3
49.2
73.4
70.7
1,927
+ ConsensusPRlinear
16.7
16.7
71.4
57.8
70.3
71.3
1,340
+ ConsensusPRmax
13.3
10.0
78.1
59.0
74.7
71.1
1,265
+ ConsensusPRCL
6.7
6.7
75.2
59.4
73.2
69.9
677
Table 6: Results across reasoning benchmarks (pass@1, pass@16, NCR, (%), TPN( Ntokens )) on Qwen3-1.7B-Base.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Model
Acc
NCR
TPN
Gemini-2.5-pro
91.8
80.1
299.42
MiniMax-M2
93.3
67.9
60.61
GPT-5.2
95.1
86.3
172.81
DeepSeek-V4-pro
95.0
73.6
144.26
Appendix
Table 7: Consistency metrics between Acc and NCR across models.
Metrics
Consistency
Recall Rate
Human Validation
62.2
90.5
Appendix
Table 8: Human annotation validation metrics including annotation consistency and recall rate.
AIME 24
AIME 25
GSM8K
MATH-500
ConsensusBench
α
Acc@16
Acc@16
Acc@1
Acc@1
Acc
NCR
0.0
36.7
33.3
67.1
54.0
65.0
79.8
0.1
40.0
43.3
90.7
61.2
84.4
77.1
0.2
40.0
36.7
92.0
58.6
84.8
78.1
0.3
43.3
33.3
91.2
58.8
84.6
76.5
0.4
40.0
43.3
91.1
62.2
85.4
77.8
Appendix
Table 9: α -sensitivity study on Qwen3-4B-Base.
Model
GSM8K
MATH500
Math-Shepherdllama2-70B
93.2
44.5
Math-Shepherdllemma-34B
90.9
46.0
Math-ShepherdDeepSeek-67B
93.3
47.0
AlphaMathDeepSeekMath-Base-7B
84.1
66.3
OmegaPRMGemma2-27B
92.2
58.2
Appendix
Table 10: Consistency metrics between Acc and NCR across models
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) optimizes LLMs using sparse verifiable final-answer rewards. This sparse anchor reliably verifies whether a trajectory succeeds but provides no direct feedback on the reasoning path that produced it. Before success, prerequisite progress on hard problems receives no reward signal; after success, outcome rewards cannot distinguish well-organized correct trajectories from redundant or locally flawed ones. We introduce SCOPE-RL (Scaffolded Chain Optimization with Process Efficiency), a two-stage framework that densifies this anchor while retaining the GRPO update: Adaptive Scaffolded RL adds prefix-decomposed verifiable rewards on answer-hidden sub-question chains before success, and Quality-Aware Process RL applies correctness-gated process-shape rewards to refine correct trajectories after success. An expert-validated Step-Quality Evaluation Protocol evaluates useful-step density, error localization, and token efficiency beyond final-answer accuracy. On Qwen3-8B-Instruct trained on DAPO-Math and Big-Math, SCOPE-RL improves average accuracy by up to 11.2 pp and reduces reasoning tokens by up to 27.1% over outcome-only GRPO; the gains hold under GSPO and on Qwen3-0.6B-Instruct, indicating that reward-signal densification is complementary to policy-update-level RLVR advances. Code and data are available at https://github.com/tokencraft-lab/SCOPE-RL.
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has become a standard paradigm for enhancing the capability of large reasoning models. RLVR typically samples responses independently and optimizes the policy using from final answers. This paradigm has two limitations. First, independently responses often contain similar intermediate reasoning steps, causing redundant exploration and wasted computation. Second, sparse final-answer rewards make it hard to identify useful steps. Tree-based methods partly address this problem by sharing prefixes and comparing branches from the same prefix to provide fine-grained signals. However, tree branches are still expanded independently. When different branches reach similar reasoning states, they cannot share information and repeat similar exploration. Moreover, tree-based methods ignore such dispersion and only perform local comparisons within separate branches, which can lead to higher variance in advantage estimation. To address this challenge, we propose GraphPO (Graph-based Policy Optimization), a novel RL framework that represents rollouts as a directed acyclic graph, with reasoning steps as edges and semantic states summarized from the reasoning paths as nodes. GraphPO merges semantically equivalent reasoning paths into equivalence classes, allowing them to share suffixes and reallocating budget away from redundant expansions to diverse exploration. Furthermore, we assign efficiency advantages to incoming edges and correctness advantages to outgoing edges, thereby improving inference efficiency while deriving process supervision from outcome. Theory shows that GraphPO reduces advantage-estimation variance and enhances reasoning efficiency. Experiments on three LLMs across reasoning and agentic search benchmarks show that GraphPO consistently outperforms chain- and tree-based baselines with the same token budgets or response budgets.
Yuliang Zhan, Xinyu Tang, Jian Li +7
Gaoling School of Artificial Intelligence, Renmin University of China · Ant Group
Reinforcement learning with verifiers (RLVR) has become a central paradigm for improving LLM reasoning, yet popular group-based optimization algorithms like GRPO often suffer from exploration collapse, where the models prematurely converge on a narrow set of high-scoring patterns, lacking the ability to explore new solutions. Recent efforts attempt to alleviate this by adding entropy regularization or diversity bonus. However, these approaches do not change the winner-takes-all nature, where rollouts still compete for individual advantage rather than cooperating for maximizing global diversity. In this work, we propose Group Cooperative Policy Optimization (GCPO), which shifts the training paradigm from rollout competition to team cooperation. Specifically, GCPO replaces independent rollout scoring with team-level credit assignment: a rollout is rewarded by how much it contributes to the team's valid solution coverage, rather than its individual accuracy. This coverage is described as a determinant volume over reward-weighted semantic embeddings, where only correct and non-redundant rollouts contribute to this volume. During advantage estimation, GCPO redistributes the collective team reward to each single rollout according to its average marginal contribution to the team. This cooperative training paradigm routes optimization toward non-redundant correct reasoning paths. Experiments across multiple reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that GCPO significantly improves both reasoning accuracy and solution diversity over existing approaches. Code will be released at https://github.com/bradybuddiemarch/gcpo.