arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2506.00027

From Mathematical Reasoning to Code: Generalization of Process Reward Models in Test-Time Scaling

Abstract

Recent advancements in improving the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models have underscored the efficacy of Process Reward Models (PRMs) in addressing intermediate errors through structured feedback mechanisms. This study analyzes PRMs from multiple perspectives, including training methodologies, scalability, and generalization capabilities. We investigate the interplay between pre-training and reward model training FLOPs to assess their influence on PRM efficiency and accuracy in complex reasoning tasks. Our analysis reveals a pattern of diminishing returns in performance with increasing PRM scale, highlighting the importance of balancing model size and computational cost. Furthermore, the diversity of training datasets significantly impacts PRM performance, emphasizing the importance of diverse data to enhance both accuracy and efficiency. We further examine test-time scaling strategies, identifying Monte Carlo Tree Search as the most effective method when computational resources are abundant, while Best-of-N Sampling serves as a practical alternative under resource-limited conditions. Notably, our findings indicate that PRMs trained on mathematical datasets exhibit performance comparable to those tailored for code generation, suggesting robust cross-domain generalization. Employing a gradient-based metric, we observe that PRMs exhibit a preference for selecting responses with similar underlying patterns, further informing their optimization.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zhengyu Chen, Yudong Wang, Teng Xiao, Ruochen Zhou, Xuesheng Yang, Wei Wang, Zhifang Sui, Jingang Wang. 2025-05-24. From Mathematical Reasoning to Code: Generalization of Process Reward Models in Test-Time Scaling. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.00027

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Universal Topological Regularity of Syntactic Structures

Despite their widespread use, the principles governing the organisation of syntactic dependency trees remain poorly understood. I analyse dependency trees from 124 typologically, genetically, and geographically diverse languages. Their topology departs systematically from randomness. Relative to uniformly sampled random trees, dependency trees exhibit greater structural robustness and lower branching heterogeneity. I propose that these universal regularities emerge naturally from incremental grammatical encoding. I model this process using sublinear preferential attachment. The model accurately reproduces the observed topology. More generally, the results demonstrate how a universal statistical property of syntax can emerge from a simple, cognitively motivated generative process. They further illustrate a broader principle of efficiency by construction: communicatively efficient syntactic structures can emerge without direct optimisation for communication.

cs.CL

An Incomplete Loop: Deductive, Inductive, and Abductive Reasoning in Language Models

Modern language models (LMs) can learn to perform new tasks in different ways: in instruction following, the target task is described explicitly in natural language; in few-shot prompting, the task is specified implicitly with a small number of examples; in instruction inference, LMs are presented with in-context examples and are then prompted to generate a natural language task description before making predictions. Each of these procedures may be thought of as invoking a different form of reasoning: instruction following involves deductive reasoning, few-shot prompting involves inductive reasoning, and instruction inference involves abductive reasoning. How do these different capabilities relate? Across four LMs (from the gpt and llama families) and two learning problems (involving arithmetic functions and machine translation) we find a strong dissociation between the different types of reasoning: LMs can sometimes learn effectively from few-shot prompts even when they are unable to explain their own prediction rules; conversely, they sometimes infer useful task descriptions while completely failing to learn from human-generated descriptions of the same task. Our results highlight the non-systematic nature of reasoning even in some of today's largest LMs, and underscore the fact that very different learning mechanisms may be invoked by seemingly similar prompting procedures.

cs.CL

Thinking beyond the anthropomorphic paradigm benefits LLM research

Anthropomorphism, or the attribution of human traits to technology, is an automatic and unconscious response that occurs even in those with advanced technical expertise. In this position paper, we analyze hundreds of thousands of research articles to present empirical evidence of the prevalence and growth of anthropomorphic terminology in research on large language models (LLMs). We argue for challenging the deeper assumptions reflected in this terminology -- which, though often useful, may inadvertently constrain LLM development -- and broadening beyond them to open new pathways for understanding and improving LLMs. Specifically, we identify and examine five anthropomorphic assumptions that shape research across the LLM development lifecycle. For each assumption (e.g., that LLMs must use natural language for reasoning, or that they should be evaluated on benchmarks originally meant for humans), we demonstrate empirical, non-anthropomorphic alternatives that remain under-explored yet offer promising directions for LLM research and development.

cs.CL