mirror of
https://github.com/hanzoai/papers.git
synced 2026-10-29 07:34:31 +00:00
520 lines
19 KiB
TeX
520 lines
19 KiB
TeX
\documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{article}
|
|
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
|
|
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
|
|
\usepackage{amsmath,amsfonts,amssymb}
|
|
\usepackage{graphicx}
|
|
\usepackage{hyperref}
|
|
\usepackage{listings}
|
|
\usepackage[dvipsnames]{xcolor}
|
|
\usepackage{booktabs}
|
|
\usepackage{float}
|
|
\usepackage{geometry}
|
|
\geometry{margin=1in}
|
|
|
|
\definecolor{zenblue}{RGB}{41,121,255}
|
|
\definecolor{zengreen}{RGB}{52,199,89}
|
|
\definecolor{zenorange}{RGB}{255,149,0}
|
|
\definecolor{codegray}{RGB}{245,245,245}
|
|
|
|
\hypersetup{
|
|
colorlinks=true,
|
|
linkcolor=zenblue,
|
|
urlcolor=zenblue,
|
|
citecolor=zenblue
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
\lstset{
|
|
backgroundcolor=\color{codegray},
|
|
basicstyle=\ttfamily\small,
|
|
breaklines=true,
|
|
captionpos=b,
|
|
frame=single,
|
|
numbers=left,
|
|
numberstyle=\tiny\color{gray}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
\title{
|
|
\vspace{-2cm}
|
|
\Large \textbf{Zen AI Model Family} \\
|
|
\vspace{0.5cm}
|
|
\Huge \textbf{Zen4-Max} \\
|
|
\vspace{0.3cm}
|
|
\large Fourth-Generation High-Performance Research Model \\
|
|
\vspace{0.5cm}
|
|
\normalsize Technical Whitepaper v2026.01
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
\author{
|
|
Zach Kelling\thanks{[email protected]} \\
|
|
\texttt{[email protected]} \\
|
|
\\
|
|
Zoo Labs Foundation \\
|
|
\texttt{[email protected]}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
\date{January 2026}
|
|
|
|
\begin{document}
|
|
|
|
\maketitle
|
|
|
|
\begin{abstract}
|
|
We present \textbf{Zen4-Max}, a 480B total parameter Mixture-of-Distilled-Experts model
|
|
activating 48B parameters per token, optimized for research-grade scientific reasoning,
|
|
mathematical proof verification, and complex long-horizon analysis. Zen4-Max achieves
|
|
93.4\% on MMLU, 90.1\% on MATH, 79.8\% on GPQA Diamond, 94.7\% on HumanEval, and
|
|
61.2\% on FrontierMath, establishing it as the highest-performing model for formal
|
|
reasoning tasks at the 48B active parameter inference cost. Through a novel
|
|
\textbf{Proof-Augmented Training} (PAT) methodology that incorporates formal verification
|
|
signals into the pretraining and post-training pipeline, Zen4-Max demonstrates qualitatively
|
|
superior performance on tasks requiring logical completeness and self-consistency.
|
|
\end{abstract}
|
|
|
|
\tableofcontents
|
|
\newpage
|
|
|
|
\section{Introduction}
|
|
|
|
Scientific progress increasingly depends on AI systems capable of reliably assisting
|
|
with tasks that require sustained, logically consistent reasoning: deriving mathematical
|
|
proofs, designing experiments, interpreting empirical results, and synthesizing findings
|
|
across hundreds of papers. These tasks share a common requirement that distinguishes them
|
|
from most benchmarks: correctness cannot be approximated by fluency. A mathematical proof
|
|
is either valid or it is not; a synthesized research hypothesis is either consistent with
|
|
its supporting evidence or it contradicts it.
|
|
|
|
Zen4-Max is designed for this regime. Its primary architectural innovation, Proof-Augmented
|
|
Training, introduces formal verification signals into both the pretraining corpus and the
|
|
post-training reward function, teaching the model to distinguish correct chains of reasoning
|
|
from plausible-but-incorrect ones. The result is measurable improvement on FrontierMath
|
|
(61.2\%), competition-level mathematics benchmarks, and scientific reasoning tasks that
|
|
require multi-step argument validation.
|
|
|
|
Positioned between Zen4-Pro (72B dense) and Zen4-Ultra (1T MoE), Zen4-Max provides a
|
|
practical inference cost (48B active parameters, achievable on 4 H100s) while approaching
|
|
the capability ceiling of the Zen4 family on reasoning-intensive tasks.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Key Contributions}
|
|
|
|
\begin{itemize}
|
|
\item \textbf{Proof-Augmented Training (PAT)}: A training methodology incorporating
|
|
formal verification signals (lean4, isabelle, and symbolic computation results) into
|
|
the pretraining corpus and using verifier outputs as post-training rewards.
|
|
\item \textbf{480B/48B MoDE}: 480B total parameter MoE with 48B active, using 64 experts
|
|
per layer with top-6 routing, optimized for research-domain specialization.
|
|
\item \textbf{FrontierMath Performance}: 61.2\% on FrontierMath, representing a significant
|
|
advance on research-mathematics benchmarks that are resistant to pattern matching.
|
|
\item \textbf{Long-Horizon Coherence}: Maintained logical consistency over outputs
|
|
exceeding 8,000 tokens, enabling full proof derivations and experimental design documents.
|
|
\end{itemize}
|
|
|
|
\section{Architecture}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Model Specifications}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{ll}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Component} & \textbf{Specification} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
Total Parameters & 480B \\
|
|
Active Parameters & 48B per token \\
|
|
Architecture & Zen MoDE (Mixture of Distilled Experts) \\
|
|
Number of Layers & 80 \\
|
|
Dense Base Layers & 24 \\
|
|
MoE Upper Layers & 56 \\
|
|
Attention Mechanism & Hierarchical Hybrid Attention (HHA) \\
|
|
Local Window Size & 16,384 tokens \\
|
|
Global Anchor Tokens & 2,048 per layer \\
|
|
Context Length & 131,072 tokens (128K) \\
|
|
Hidden Dimension & 7,168 \\
|
|
Experts per MoE Layer & 64 \\
|
|
Active Experts per Token & 6 (top-6 routing) \\
|
|
Expert Intermediate Dim & 2,816 \\
|
|
Attention Heads & 56 \\
|
|
Key-Value Heads & 8 (GQA) \\
|
|
Vocabulary Size & 151,936 \\
|
|
Positional Encoding & RoPE ($\theta = 10{,}000{,}000$) \\
|
|
Normalization & RMSNorm \\
|
|
Activation & SwiGLU \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Zen4-Max Architecture Specifications}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Expert Specialization for Research Domains}
|
|
|
|
Zen4-Max uses 64 experts per MoE layer organized into four research-domain clusters:
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Expert Cluster} & \textbf{Count} & \textbf{Primary Data Sources} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
Mathematics and formal proof & 16 & ArXiv math, Lean4 libraries, OEIS \\
|
|
Physical sciences & 14 & ArXiv physics, NIST databases \\
|
|
Life sciences and chemistry & 12 & PubMed, ChEMBL, protein databases \\
|
|
Computer science and systems & 14 & ArXiv CS, GitHub, formal specs \\
|
|
General reasoning & 8 & All domains \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
\textbf{Total} & 64 & --- \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Zen4-Max Expert Cluster Configuration}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
Top-6 routing across 64 experts activates 9.4\% of expert parameters per token.
|
|
The routing mechanism uses a sigmoid-normalized gating function rather than softmax,
|
|
which reduces routing sensitivity to outlier logit values and improves stability
|
|
on long contexts where token distributions shift significantly.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Proof-Augmented Training Architecture}
|
|
|
|
PAT operates at two levels: the pretraining corpus and the post-training reward function.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Corpus-Level PAT}
|
|
|
|
The pretraining corpus includes formal proof corpora that provide ground-truth logical
|
|
structures:
|
|
|
|
\begin{itemize}
|
|
\item Mathlib4 (Lean4): 250,000+ theorems with complete formal proofs.
|
|
\item Isabelle Archive of Formal Proofs: 720+ theory developments.
|
|
\item HOL Light standard library: 12,000+ theorems.
|
|
\item Symbolic computation results from SymPy and Mathematica (open datasets).
|
|
\end{itemize}
|
|
|
|
These corpora are presented in a unified format that interleaves the formal statement,
|
|
the tactic proof steps, and the verified status of each step. The model learns to
|
|
distinguish verified from unverified reasoning by observing this structure.
|
|
|
|
\subsubsection{Reward-Level PAT}
|
|
|
|
During post-training, mathematical generation tasks use a hybrid reward:
|
|
|
|
\begin{equation}
|
|
R_{\text{PAT}} = \alpha \cdot R_{\text{outcome}} + \beta \cdot R_{\text{verify}} + \gamma \cdot R_{\text{style}}
|
|
\end{equation}
|
|
|
|
where $R_{\text{outcome}}$ is the binary correctness of the final answer, $R_{\text{verify}}$
|
|
is the output of a learned step-level verification model that scores each reasoning step's
|
|
logical validity, and $R_{\text{style}}$ penalizes informal hedging language in mathematical
|
|
contexts (phrases like ``approximately'' or ``should be'' in proof steps). Empirically,
|
|
$\alpha = 0.6, \beta = 0.3, \gamma = 0.1$ produces optimal FrontierMath performance.
|
|
|
|
\section{Training}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Pretraining Data}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Data Category} & \textbf{Proportion} & \textbf{Tokens} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
Web (quality-filtered) & 30\% & 7.5T \\
|
|
Code and formal specifications & 25\% & 6.25T \\
|
|
Scientific literature (ArXiv) & 20\% & 5.0T \\
|
|
Mathematical content & 12\% & 3.0T \\
|
|
Formal proofs (Lean4, Isabelle) & 5\% & 1.25T \\
|
|
Tool-call trajectories & 5\% & 1.25T \\
|
|
Books and long-form prose & 3\% & 0.75T \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
\textbf{Total} & 100\% & 25.0T \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Zen4-Max Pretraining Data Composition (25T tokens)}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
Formal proof data (5\%) is over-represented relative to its natural occurrence in the web
|
|
corpus by approximately 50$\times$. This over-representation is critical for PAT: without
|
|
sufficient formal proof exposure, the verification reward signal cannot be internalized.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Training Infrastructure}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{ll}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Parameter} & \textbf{Value} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
Hardware & 8,192 $\times$ H100 80GB SXM \\
|
|
Expert Parallelism & 64 (one expert per device) \\
|
|
Tensor Parallelism & TP=4 \\
|
|
Pipeline Parallelism & PP=10 \\
|
|
Data Parallelism & DP=32 \\
|
|
Global Batch Size & 12M tokens \\
|
|
Peak Learning Rate & $1 \times 10^{-4}$ \\
|
|
LR Schedule & Cosine with warmup (2500 steps) \\
|
|
Optimizer & AdamW ($\beta_1=0.9, \beta_2=0.95$) \\
|
|
Training Duration & 52 days \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Zen4-Max Training Infrastructure}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Post-Training Stages}
|
|
|
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
|
\item \textbf{SFT} (5M pairs): Heavy emphasis on mathematical derivation and
|
|
scientific analysis tasks. Includes 200K formal proof demonstrations in natural
|
|
language augmented with lean4 verification certificates.
|
|
\item \textbf{PAT-GRPO}: Proof-Augmented GRPO over 80K mathematics tasks with
|
|
SymPy-verified answers. $G=16$ rollouts per task; the step-level verifier provides
|
|
intermediate rewards at each reasoning step.
|
|
\item \textbf{DPO}: 900K comparison pairs, weighted 3:1 toward research tasks.
|
|
\item \textbf{Safety Alignment}: Standard constitutional AI pass.
|
|
\end{enumerate}
|
|
|
|
\section{Evaluation}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Standard Benchmarks}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Benchmark} & \textbf{Zen3-Max} & \textbf{Zen4-Pro} & \textbf{Zen4-Max} & \textbf{$\Delta$ vs Zen3} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
MMLU (5-shot) & 87.3\% & 91.8\% & 93.4\% & +6.1\% \\
|
|
MATH (4-shot) & 84.6\% & 87.6\% & 90.1\% & +5.5\% \\
|
|
HumanEval (0-shot) & 89.7\% & 93.2\% & 94.7\% & +5.0\% \\
|
|
GPQA Diamond & 72.1\% & 74.3\% & 79.8\% & +7.7\% \\
|
|
IFEval & 84.3\% & 88.4\% & 89.1\% & +4.8\% \\
|
|
BBH (3-shot) & 84.9\% & 89.7\% & 91.4\% & +6.5\% \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Standard Benchmark Results: Zen4-Max vs. Prior Art}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Research and Formal Reasoning}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Benchmark} & \textbf{Zen3-Max} & \textbf{Zen4-Max} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
FrontierMath (overall) & 48.3\% & 61.2\% \\
|
|
FrontierMath (Level 1) & 71.4\% & 82.7\% \\
|
|
FrontierMath (Level 2) & 45.8\% & 59.3\% \\
|
|
FrontierMath (Level 3) & 27.7\% & 41.6\% \\
|
|
AIME 2024 (avg 2 sets) & 71.3\% & 81.4\% \\
|
|
OlympiadBench & 59.2\% & 68.7\% \\
|
|
ProofWriter (deductive) & 83.4\% & 91.2\% \\
|
|
FOLIO (first-order logic) & 79.8\% & 87.6\% \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Research and Formal Reasoning Benchmarks}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Scientific Domain Evaluation}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Domain Benchmark} & \textbf{Metric} & \textbf{Zen4-Max} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
GPQA Diamond (physics) & Accuracy & 81.3\% \\
|
|
GPQA Diamond (chemistry) & Accuracy & 78.4\% \\
|
|
GPQA Diamond (biology) & Accuracy & 79.7\% \\
|
|
SciBench (university-level)& Accuracy & 86.2\% \\
|
|
MedQA USMLE (4-opt) & Accuracy & 88.7\% \\
|
|
ClimateBench & Accuracy & 74.3\% \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Scientific Domain Evaluation}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Long-Output Coherence}
|
|
|
|
A key capability for research assistance is maintaining logical consistency across
|
|
long generated outputs. We evaluate this using a custom \textbf{Proof Coherence Score}
|
|
that measures the rate at which self-contained mathematical arguments in long outputs
|
|
are free of logical contradictions, verified by a symbolic checker.
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Output Length} & \textbf{Zen4-Pro} & \textbf{Zen4-Max} & \textbf{Zen4-Thinking} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
1K tokens & 94.1\% & 96.8\% & 97.3\% \\
|
|
4K tokens & 87.3\% & 92.4\% & 95.1\% \\
|
|
8K tokens & 74.2\% & 86.7\% & 91.8\% \\
|
|
16K tokens & 61.8\% & 78.3\% & 85.4\% \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Proof Coherence Score by Output Length}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\section{Related Work}
|
|
|
|
FrontierMath \cite{glazer2024frontiermath} provides a benchmark of research-mathematics
|
|
problems designed to be resistant to pattern matching and memorization, representing a
|
|
meaningful signal of genuine mathematical reasoning capability. Prior published scores on
|
|
this benchmark range from single digits for standard instruction-tuned models to the
|
|
mid-50s for extended-thinking models; Zen4-Max's 61.2\% represents the current best result
|
|
in our evaluation.
|
|
|
|
Formal verification integration into language model training has been explored in the
|
|
context of Lean-based theorem provers \cite{polu2022formal} and RLHF with verifier reward
|
|
models \cite{lightman2023let}. PAT extends this by incorporating verification signals at
|
|
the pretraining stage, not only during post-training, which we find is critical for
|
|
deep internalization of proof structure.
|
|
|
|
Expert specialization in MoE models through domain-partitioned data mixtures was explored
|
|
in prior work on mixture-of-experts for multilingual models \cite{artetxe2021efficient}.
|
|
Zen4-Max applies this principle to scientific domains with more granular expert routing.
|
|
|
|
\section{Deployment}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Hardware Requirements}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{llll}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Format} & \textbf{VRAM} & \textbf{Context} & \textbf{Hardware} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
FP8 & 4$\times$ H100 80GB & 128K & Recommended \\
|
|
FP8 & 2$\times$ H100 80GB & 64K & Reduced context \\
|
|
INT4 (AWQ) & 4$\times$ A100 80GB & 32K & Budget option \\
|
|
INT4 (AWQ) & 2$\times$ A100 80GB & 16K & Minimal config \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Zen4-Max Deployment Configurations}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Research Workflow Integration}
|
|
|
|
\begin{lstlisting}[language=Python, caption=Zen4-Max for Mathematical Proof Assistance]
|
|
from hanzo import HanzoAI
|
|
|
|
client = HanzoAI()
|
|
|
|
system_prompt = """You are a mathematical research assistant.
|
|
When proving theorems, proceed step by step.
|
|
Each step should follow logically from prior steps or stated axioms.
|
|
Flag any step requiring an unproved assumption.
|
|
"""
|
|
|
|
response = client.chat.completions.create(
|
|
model="zen4-max",
|
|
messages=[
|
|
{"role": "system", "content": system_prompt},
|
|
{"role": "user", "content": "Prove that sqrt(2) is irrational."}
|
|
],
|
|
max_tokens=4096,
|
|
temperature=0.0, # deterministic for proof generation
|
|
)
|
|
\end{lstlisting}
|
|
|
|
\section{Safety and Alignment}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Metric} & \textbf{Zen3-Max} & \textbf{Zen4-Max} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
Harmful content refusal & 96.1\% & 98.4\% \\
|
|
Over-refusal rate & 5.3\% & 3.1\% \\
|
|
Jailbreak resistance & 94.8\% & 97.9\% \\
|
|
TruthfulQA & 76.8\% & 84.7\% \\
|
|
Scientific claim accuracy & 83.4\% & 89.2\% \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Safety and Alignment Metrics}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
Scientific claim accuracy measures the rate at which the model's scientific assertions
|
|
match peer-reviewed consensus, evaluated by domain experts on 500 sampled claims per
|
|
scientific domain. The improvement from 83.4\% to 89.2\% reflects the increased
|
|
scientific literature proportion in pretraining and the PAT reward signal penalizing
|
|
unsupported assertions.
|
|
|
|
\subsection{Limitations}
|
|
|
|
\begin{itemize}
|
|
\item FrontierMath performance (61.2\%) indicates significant headroom on research-level
|
|
mathematics; Zen4-Thinking is recommended for tasks where extended reasoning budget
|
|
is more important than knowledge breadth.
|
|
\item Formal proof output is not guaranteed to be machine-verifiable without post-processing;
|
|
the model learns proof style from Lean4 but does not run a lean4 kernel during inference.
|
|
\item Expert routing is non-deterministic across batch sizes; results may vary slightly
|
|
when comparing single-item and batched inference.
|
|
\end{itemize}
|
|
|
|
\section{Conclusion}
|
|
|
|
Zen4-Max establishes the highest standard for research-grade AI assistance at a practical
|
|
inference cost. Through Proof-Augmented Training, it internalizes formal reasoning
|
|
structure during pretraining rather than only imitating it during fine-tuning. The 480B/48B
|
|
Zen MoDE architecture concentrates domain expertise in research clusters that are
|
|
selectively activated by the routing mechanism for each token. With 90.1\% on MATH,
|
|
79.8\% on GPQA Diamond, and 61.2\% on FrontierMath, Zen4-Max is the recommended choice
|
|
for research institutions, quantitative finance, pharmaceutical discovery, and any
|
|
application where logical completeness and scientific accuracy are primary requirements.
|
|
|
|
\section*{Acknowledgments}
|
|
|
|
We thank the formal methods research community whose open Lean4 and Isabelle corpora
|
|
made Proof-Augmented Training possible, the Zoo Labs Foundation science team for
|
|
domain evaluation design, and the Hanzo AI infrastructure team for the training cluster.
|
|
|
|
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
|
\bibliography{references}
|
|
|
|
\appendix
|
|
|
|
\section{Model Card}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{ll}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Field} & \textbf{Value} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
Model Name & Zen4-Max \\
|
|
Version & v2026.01 \\
|
|
Release Date & January 2026 \\
|
|
Total Parameters & 480B \\
|
|
Active Parameters& 48B per token \\
|
|
Context Length & 131,072 tokens \\
|
|
License & Apache 2.0 (weights) \\
|
|
Repository & \href{https://huggingface.co/zenlm/zen4-max}{huggingface.co/zenlm/zen4-max} \\
|
|
Documentation & \href{https://papers.zenlm.org/zen4-max}{papers.zenlm.org/zen4-max} \\
|
|
Contact & [email protected] \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{Zen4-Max Model Card}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
\section{PAT Ablation Study}
|
|
|
|
\begin{table}[H]
|
|
\centering
|
|
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
|
|
\toprule
|
|
\textbf{Training Configuration} & \textbf{MATH} & \textbf{FrontierMath} & \textbf{GPQA} \\
|
|
\midrule
|
|
Base (no PAT) & 85.3\% & 48.1\% & 74.8\% \\
|
|
+ Formal corpus (pretraining) & 87.4\% & 53.6\% & 76.3\% \\
|
|
+ Step-level reward (GRPO) & 89.1\% & 58.4\% & 78.7\% \\
|
|
+ Style penalty ($\gamma$ term) & 90.1\% & 61.2\% & 79.8\% \\
|
|
\bottomrule
|
|
\end{tabular}
|
|
\caption{PAT Ablation: Contribution of Each Component}
|
|
\end{table}
|
|
|
|
Each PAT component contributes incrementally. The formal corpus provides the largest
|
|
gain on FrontierMath (5.5 points), while the step-level reward provides the largest
|
|
gain on MATH (1.7 points, where intermediate step quality is most important).
|
|
The style penalty provides a smaller but consistent benefit across all three benchmarks.
|
|
|
|
\end{document}
|