Think or Not Think: A Study of Explicit Thinking in Rule-Based Visual Reinforcement Fine-Tuning
This paper investigates the role of explicit thinking process in rule-based reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT) for MLLMs. We first propose CLS-RL for MLLM image classification, using verifiable rewards for fine-tuning. Experiments show CLS-RL significantly outperforms SFT and yields a cross-dataset generalization effect. We then rethink and question whether explicit thinking in RFT is always necessary. Challenging the convention that explicit thinking is crucial for the success of RFT, we introduce No-Thinking-RL, exploring RFT without thinking by introducing a simple equality accuracy reward. We evaluate No-Thinking-RL on 6 diverse tasks across different model sizes and types. Experimental results reveal three key findings: 1). Visual perception tasks do not require thinking during RFT, as No-Thinking-RL consistently outperforms or matches Thinking-based RFT across model sizes. 2).} Models with limited capabilities struggle to generate high-quality CoT for RFT, making Thinking-based RFT less effective than No-Thinking-RL. 3). There are inconsistencies between the answers in the thinking and answer tags for some responses of thinking-based RFT, which show lower accuracy than the overall accuracy. We hypothesize that explicit thinking before verifiable answers may hinder reward convergence and reduce performance. To test this hypothesis, we propose Think-After-Answer, which places thinking after the answer to mitigate this effect for experimental verification. Lastly, we conduct a pilot study to explore whether MLLMs can learn when to think during RFT, introducing an Adaptive-Thinking method. Experiments show that it converges to a specific prompt depending on model capability and task complexity, achieving comparable or better performance than both Thinking and No-Thinking-RL. This suggests MLLMs can adaptively decide to think or not based on their capabilities and task complexity.
Code (1)
Tasks
ClassificationFew-Shot Learningimage-classificationImage Classificationreinforcement-learningReinforcement LearningReinforcement Learning (RL)Methods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
When Can Large Reasoning Models Save Thinking? Mechanistic Analysis of Behavioral Divergence in Reasoning
Large reasoning models (LRMs) have significantly advanced performance on complex tasks, yet their tendency to overthink introduces inefficiencies. This study investigates the internal mechanisms of reinforcement learning…
Reinforcement Learning (RL)Mitigating Factual Hallucination in Large Reasoning Models via Mixed-Mode Advantage Regularization
Large reasoning models (LRMs) improve language model capabilities by generating explicit thinking traces before final answers. In factuality-oriented question answering (QA), such thinking often improves overall performa…
Reinforcement LearningQuestion AnsweringThinking Makes LLM Agents Introverted: How Mandatory Thinking Can Backfire in User-Engaged Agents
Eliciting reasoning has emerged as a powerful technique for improving the performance of large language models (LLMs) on complex tasks by inducing thinking. However, their effectiveness in realistic user-engaged agent sc…
RadThinking: A Dataset for Longitudinal Clinical Reasoning in Radiology
Cancer screening is a reasoning task. A radiologist observes findings, compares them to prior scans, integrates clinical context, and reaches a diagnostic conclusion confirmed by pathology. We present RadThinking, a Visu…
Visual Question AnsweringExploring Human-Like Thinking in Search Simulations with Large Language Models
Simulating user search behavior is a critical task in information retrieval, which can be employed for user behavior modeling, data augmentation, and system evaluation. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs)…
Data AugmentationInformation RetrievalUser Simulation