Cited by 5Topic ModelingInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

ReARTeR: Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning with Trustworthy Process Rewarding

Open access
Sun, Zhongxiang, Wang, Qipeng, Yu, Weijie, Zang, Xiaoxue, Zheng, Kai, Xu, Jun, Zhang, Xiao, Song, Yang +1 more·2025·Proceedings of the 48th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval

Abstract

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems for Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in knowledge-intensive tasks, yet their reasoning capabilities, particularly for complex multi-step reasoning, remain limited. Although recent approaches have explored integrating RAG with chain-of-thought reasoning or incorporating test-time search with process reward model (PRM), these methods face several untrustworthy challenges, including lack of explanations, bias in PRM training data, early-step bias in PRM scores, and ignoring post-training that fails to fully optimize reasoning potential. To address these issues, we propose Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning through Trustworthy Process Rewarding (ReARTeR), a framework that enhances RAG systems' reasoning capabilities through both post-training and test-time scaling. At test time, ReARTeR introduces Trustworthy Process Rewarding via a Process Reward Model for accurate scalar scoring and a Process Explanation Model (PEM) for generating natural language explanations, enabling step refinement. During post-training, we leverage Monte Carlo Tree Search guided by Trustworthy Process Rewarding to collect high-quality step-level preference data, which is used to optimize the model through Iterative Preference Optimization. ReARTeR tackles three key challenges: (1) misalignment between PRM and PEM, addressed through off-policy preference learning; (2) bias in PRM training data, mitigated by a balanced annotation method and incorporating stronger annotations for difficult examples; and (3) early-step bias in PRM, resolved via a temporal-difference-based look-ahead search strategy. Experimental results on multi-step reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that ReARTeR significantly improves reasoning performance, highlighting its potential to advance the reasoning capability of RAG systems.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3726302.3730102

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Floren- cia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. 2023. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023). · arXiv
  2. Cameron B Browne, Edward Powley, Daniel Whitehouse, Simon M Lucas, Peter I Cowling, Philipp Rohlfshagen, Stephen Tavener, Diego Perez, Spyridon Samoth- rakis, and Simon Colton. 2012. A survey of monte carlo tree search methods. IEEE Transactions on Computational Intelligence and AI in games 4, 1 (2012), 1-43.
  3. Guanting Dong, Chenghao Zhang, Mengjie Deng, Yutao Zhu, Zhicheng Dou, and Ji-Rong Wen. 2024. Progressive Multimodal Reasoning via Active Retrieval. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14835 (2024). · arXiv
  4. Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Amy Yang, Angela Fan, et al. 2024. The llama 3 herd of models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21783 (2024). · arXiv
  5. Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff, Dan Jurafsky, and Douwe Kiela. 2024. Kto: Model alignment as prospect theoretic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01306 (2024). · arXiv
  6. Wenqi Fan, Yujuan Ding, Liangbo Ning, Shijie Wang, Hengyun Li, Dawei Yin, Tat-Seng Chua, and Qing Li. 2024. A Survey on RAG Meeting LLMs: Towards Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (Barcelona, Spain) (KDD '24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 6491-6501. https://doi.org/10.1145/3637528.3671470 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Edward J Hu, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, Weizhu Chen, et al. [n. d.]. LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models. In International Conference on Learning Representations.
  8. Jie Huang, Xinyun Chen, Swaroop Mishra, Huaixiu Steven Zheng, Adams Wei Yu, Xinying Song, and Denny Zhou. 2024. Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview.net/forum?id=IkmD3fKBPQ
  9. Soyeong Jeong, Jinheon Baek, Sukmin Cho, Sung Ju Hwang, and Jong Park. 2024. Adaptive-RAG: Learning to Adapt Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models through Question Complexity. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers), Kevin Duh, Helena Gomez, and Steven Bethard (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Mexico City, Mexico, 7036-7050. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-long.389 · DOI
  10. Soyeong Jeong, Jinheon Baek, Sukmin Cho, Sung Ju Hwang, and Jong C Park. 2024. Adaptive-RAG: Learning to Adapt Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models through Question Complexity. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers). 7029-7043.
  11. Jiajie Jin, Yutao Zhu, Xinyu Yang, Chenghao Zhang, and Zhicheng Dou. 2024. FlashRAG: A Modular Toolkit for Efficient Retrieval-Augmented Generation Research. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.13576 (2024). · arXiv
  12. Jaehyung Kim, Jaehyun Nam, Sangwoo Mo, Jongjin Park, Sang-Woo Lee, Minjoon Seo, Jung-Woo Ha, and Jinwoo Shin. [n. d.]. SuRe: Summarizing Retrievals using Answer Candidates for Open-domain QA of LLMs. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations.
  13. Jaehyung Kim, Jaehyun Nam, Sangwoo Mo, Jongjin Park, Sang-Woo Lee, Min- joon Seo, Jung-Woo Ha, and Jinwoo Shin. 2024. SuRe: Summarizing Retrievals using Answer Candidates for Open-domain QA of LLMs. In The Twelfth Interna- tional Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview.net/forum?id= w4DW6qkRmt
  14. Haitao Li, Qian Dong, Junjie Chen, Huixue Su, Yujia Zhou, Qingyao Ai, Ziyi Ye, and Yiqun Liu. 2024. LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.05579 (2024). · arXiv
  15. Xingxuan Li, Weiwen Xu, Ruochen Zhao, Fangkai Jiao, Shafiq Joty, and Lidong Bing. 2024. Can We Further Elicit Reasoning in LLMs? Critic-Guided Planning with Retrieval-Augmentation for Solving Challenging Tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.01428 (2024). · arXiv
  16. Chris Yuhao Liu, Liang Zeng, Jiacai Liu, Rui Yan, Jujie He, Chaojie Wang, Shuicheng Yan, Yang Liu, and Yahui Zhou. 2024. Skywork-Reward: Bag of Tricks for Reward Modeling in LLMs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.18451 (2024). · arXiv
  17. Liangchen Luo, Yinxiao Liu, Rosanne Liu, Samrat Phatale, Harsh Lara, Yunxuan Li, Lei Shu, Yun Zhu, Lei Meng, Jiao Sun, et al. 2024. Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06592 (2024). · arXiv
  18. Trung Quoc Luong, Xinbo Zhang, Zhanming Jie, Peng Sun, Xiaoran Jin, and Hang Li. 2024. Reft: Reasoning with reinforced fine-tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.08967 (2024). · arXiv
  19. Aman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan, Luyu Gao, Sarah Wiegreffe, Uri Alon, Nouha Dziri, Shrimai Prabhumoye, Yiming Yang, et al. 2024. Self-refine: Iterative refinement with self-feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  20. Richard Yuanzhe Pang, Weizhe Yuan, Kyunghyun Cho, He He, Sainbayar Sukhbaatar, and Jason Weston. 2024. Iterative reasoning preference optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.19733 (2024). · arXiv
  21. Zhihong Shao, Yeyun Gong, Yelong Shen, Minlie Huang, Nan Duan, and Weizhu Chen. 2023. Enhancing retrieval-augmented large language models with iterative retrieval-generation synergy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.15294 (2023). · arXiv
  22. Weijia Shi, Sewon Min, Michihiro Yasunaga, Minjoon Seo, Rich James, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Wen-tau Yih. 2023. Replug: Retrieval-augmented black-box language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12652 (2023). · arXiv
  23. Avi Singh, John D Co-Reyes, Rishabh Agarwal, Ankesh Anand, Piyush Patil, Xavier Garcia, Peter J Liu, James Harrison, Jaehoon Lee, Kelvin Xu, et al. 2023. Beyond human data: Scaling self-training for problem-solving with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.06585 (2023). · arXiv
  24. Charlie Snell, Jaehoon Lee, Kelvin Xu, and Aviral Kumar. 2024. Scaling llm test- time compute optimally can be more effective than scaling model parameters. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03314 (2024). · arXiv
  25. Richard Sutton. 2019. The Bitter Lesson. http://incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/ BitterLesson.html Incomplete Ideas (blog), 13(1):38.
  26. Richard S Sutton and Andrew G Barto. 2018. Reinforcement learning: An intro- duction. MIT press.
  27. Liang Wang, Nan Yang, Xiaolong Huang, Binxing Jiao, Linjun Yang, Daxin Jiang, Rangan Majumder, and Furu Wei. 2022. Text embeddings by weakly-supervised contrastive pre-training. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.03533 (2022). · arXiv
  28. Peiyi Wang, Lei Li, Zhihong Shao, Runxin Xu, Damai Dai, Yifei Li, Deli Chen, Yu Wu, and Zhifang Sui. 2024. Math-shepherd: Verify and reinforce llms step-by-step without human annotations. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 9426-9439.
  29. Yile Wang, Peng Li, Maosong Sun, and Yang Liu. 2023. Self-knowledge guided retrieval augmentation for large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05002 (2023). · arXiv
  30. Zihan Wang, Yunxuan Li, Yuexin Wu, Liangchen Luo, Le Hou, Hongkun Yu, and Jingbo Shang. 2024. Multi-step problem solving through a verifier: An empirical analysis on model-induced process supervision. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.02658 (2024). · arXiv
  31. Zhenyu Wu, Qingkai Zeng, Zhihan Zhang, Zhaoxuan Tan, Chao Shen, and Meng Jiang. 2024. Enhancing Mathematical Reasoning in LLMs by Stepwise Correction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.12934 (2024). · arXiv
  32. Yuxi Xie, Anirudh Goyal, Wenyue Zheng, Min-Yen Kan, Timothy P Lillicrap, Kenji Kawaguchi, and Michael Shieh. 2024. Monte Carlo Tree Search Boosts Reasoning via Iterative Preference Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.00451 (2024). · arXiv
  33. Fangyuan Xu, Weijia Shi, and Eunsol Choi. 2024. RECOMP: Improving Retrieval- Augmented LMs with Context Compression and Selective Augmentation. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview. net/forum?id=mlJLVigNHp
  34. Zhilin Yang, Peng Qi, Saizheng Zhang, Yoshua Bengio, William Cohen, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Christopher D Manning. 2018. HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 2369-2380.
  35. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. 2023. ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
  36. Zhenrui Yue, Honglei Zhuang, Aijun Bai, Kai Hui, Rolf Jagerman, Hansi Zeng, Zhen Qin, Dong Wang, Xuanhui Wang, and Michael Bendersky. 2024. Infer- ence scaling for long-context retrieval augmented generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.04343 (2024). · arXiv
  37. Yuxiang Zhang, Yuqi Yang, Jiangming Shu, Yuhang Wang, Jinlin Xiao, and Jitao Sang. 2024. OpenRFT: Adapting Reasoning Foundation Model for Domain- specific Tasks with Reinforcement Fine-Tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16849 (2024). · arXiv
  38. Yu Zhao, Huifeng Yin, Bo Zeng, Hao Wang, Tianqi Shi, Chenyang Lyu, Longyue Wang, Weihua Luo, and Kaifu Zhang. 2024. Marco-o1: Towards open reasoning models for open-ended solutions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.14405 (2024). · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sun, Z., Wang, Q., Yu, W., Zang, X., Zheng, K., Xu, J., Zhang, X., Song, Y., & Li, H.
Affiliations
  • Renmin University of China (CN)
  • University of International Business and Economics (CN)
  • Kuaishou (China) (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the 48th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval
Publisher
ACM
Published
2025-07-13
Pages
1251-1261
OpenAlex
W4412377895
Cited by
5
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1
FWCI
4.78
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (2023YFA1008704)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (62472426, 62376275)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
retrieval-augmented generation, process reward models, multi-step reasoning, chain-of-thought reasoning, Monte Carlo tree search, training data bias, large language models, explanation generation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review