Meet In CommonNews

Local

Does Reward Training Teach AI New Reasoning? A New Paper Says No. Checked and Re-Run

Meet in Common connects news with real conversations. Use ThinkMatch to arrange a Roundtable and meet people to discuss this story.

Source: Cherry Creek News

By Sofia Reyes A new workshop paper argues that the training method behind today’s reasoning models, reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards, does not teach a model new reasoning. “RLVR Sharpens the Pencil, Not the Mind” by Shreeyam Bangera and Manya Gupta of IIT Roorkee (arXiv:2611.02574, posted 2 November 2026, accepted at the MOSS workshop at COLM 2026) tracked Ai2’s open OLMo 2 1B model across 13 training snapshots on grade-school maths. First-try accuracy rose from 58.0% to 61.3%, while a simple detector for planted arithmetic mistakes stayed flat; the only internal change the authors found was at the final answer. Novel Cognition checked the paper against its own tables and released code, re-ran its accuracy measurements on a MacBook Pro with the authors’ own prompt and answer checker, and added the one model the paper leaves out: the one from before training began. The full analysis is at rlvr.novcog.us.com.

This excerpt comes from the named source. Read the original for the full reporting.

Read the original at Cherry Creek News

Featured places to meet in Palo Alto, CA

Explore these places and arrange a conversation through ThinkMatch.

Yutori

Yutori 3375 El Camino Real Palo Alto, CA, 94306 US

Cafe Riace

Cafe Riace 200 Sheridan Avenue Palo Alto, CA, US

City guide for Palo Alto, CA

Community Poll

Canceling a digital subscription should be as easy as starting one.

Share your view, then see how readers voted. No sign-in required. This poll is shared across stories.

Do you agree or disagree?

Choose one answer

Common Quandary

A Common Quandary to discuss

Another conversation to explore, separate from this news story.

The restaurant forgot your expensive entrée. Do you point it out?

After a crowded dinner, you notice the restaurant omitted your most expensive entrée from the bill. Service was slow, the server seemed overwhelmed, and correcting it may create trouble for the person who made the mistake.

Does protecting someone from consequences ever justify benefiting from their error?

Explore this quandary