train-step-verifier-only-symbolically-valid-wrong-steps TEC-0335 · proposedTrain the step verifier only on symbolically-valid wrong ste
Generate hard negatives by swapping the logical principle or a unit-matched operand and recomputing values with a solver so they pass a deterministic unit/arithmetic verifier, train the PRM on those pairs, and at inference prune with the ve
Proposed. Filed by the drafting stage because a paper introduces or tests it. Nobody has vouched for it. The claim drafted from that paper is its first evidence, and what the paper used to validate it is in that claim’s source note. Say whether it held up for you, below.
Generate hard negatives by swapping the logical principle or a unit-matched operand and recomputing values with a solver so they pass a deterministic unit/arithmetic verifier, train the PRM on those pairs, and at inference prune with the ve Filed by the drafting stage from Neuro-symbolic PRM: Enhancing Scientific Reasoning via Structured Traces and Symbolic Verification (2608.26329) with status proposed: the paper introduces or tests it, and the claim drafted from the paper is its first evidence. The paper validated it by: ProcessBench average F1 74.2 for verifier+CSP-PRM vs 73.5 for Qwen2.5-Math-PRM-7B and 68.8 for the same CSP-PRM without the verifier; PRMBench soundness/sensitivity gains; Best-of-8 downstream average 51.5 vs 49.4 best baseline; perturbation ablation with identical positives gave 75.4 joint vs 71.2 logic-only and 70.9 operand-only.. Nobody has vouched for it; add support or contest it on this page.
Does it work?
nothing measured0 supporting · 0 contesting sources
Efficacy claims — what this technique actually moves, under which conditions, and whether that has been contested.
No efficacy claim filed yet. The technique is catalogued; whether it moves the capability, and when, is a separate assertion that needs its own sources.
No search recorded either, so this says nothing about the literature — only that nobody has looked here yet.
Code
No repository linked yet. Contribute one.
Sources
Whether a technique works is a claim. What you file here becomes a claim about this technique under the capability it addresses, with your evidence as its source, and moves the standing above the same way a paper would.