EvidenceRL: Reinforcing Evidence Consistency for Trustworthy Language Models
Large Language Models (LLMs) are fluent but prone to hallucinations, producing answers that appear plausible yet are unsupported by available evidence. This failure is especially problematic in high-stakes domains where decisions must be justified by verifiable information. We introduce \textbf{EvidenceRL}, a reinforcement learning framework that enforces evidence adherence during training. EvidenceRL scores candidate responses for grounding (entailment with retrieved evidence and context) and correctness (agreement with reference answers) and optimizes the generator using Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). We evaluate across two high-stakes domains, cardiac diagnosis and legal reasoning, where EvidenceRL consistently improves evidence grounding and faithfulness without sacrificing task accuracy. On cardiac diagnosis, F1@3 increases from 37.0 to 54.5 on Llama-3.2-3B while grounding ($G_{\max}@3$) rises from 47.6 to 78.2; hallucinations drop nearly 5$\times$ and evidence-supported diagnoses increase from 31.8\% to 61.6\%. On legal reasoning, EvidenceRL raises Faithfulness from 32.8\% to 67.6\% on Llama-3.1-8B, demonstrating consistent behavioral change across domains. Our code is open-sourced at https://github.com/Wizaaard/EvidenceRL.git.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Reinforcement LearningLegal ReasoningSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Video-R2: Reinforcing Consistent and Grounded Reasoning in Multimodal Language Models
Reasoning over dynamic visual content remains a central challenge for multimodal large language models. Recent thinking models generate explicit reasoning traces for interpretability; however, their reasoning often appea…
Reinforcement LearningAligning with Logic: Measuring, Evaluating and Improving Logical Preference Consistency in Large Language Models
Large Language Models (LLMs) are expected to be predictable and trustworthy to support reliable decision-making systems. Yet current LLMs often show inconsistencies in their judgments. In this work, we examine logical pr…
Decision MakingNegationLeveraging Evidence-Guided LLMs to Enhance Trustworthy Depression Diagnosis
Large language models (LLMs) show promise in automating clinical diagnosis, yet their non-transparent decision-making and limited alignment with diagnostic standards hinder trust and clinical adoption. We address this ch…
Logical ReasoningHeuristic Heterogeneous Graph Reasoning Networks for Fact Verification
Existing studies on table-based fact verification generally capture linguistic evidence from claim-table subgraphs or logical evidence from program-table subgraphs independently. However, there is insufficient associatio…
Fact Verificationgraph constructionTable-based Fact VerificationEMAD: Evidence-Centric Grounded Multimodal Diagnosis for Alzheimer's Disease
Deep learning models for medical image analysis often act as black boxes, seldom aligning with clinical guidelines or explicitly linking decisions to supporting evidence. This is especially critical in Alzheimer's diseas…