Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) and standard benchmark evaluation both rely on an automatic verifier that turns a free text answer into a binary reward. Prior work reports that one evaluation harness accepts only about 94% of its own ground truth answers, blaming LaTeX parsing. That is an aggregate: it does not say which answer forms consume the error budget. We supply the decomposition. We apply metamorphic testing to the verifier rather than the model, generating certified equivalent answer variants, that is, rewrites that preserve mathematical meaning by construction, so that any rejection is a provable false negative needing no human adjudication. We then measure rejection per answer category across four widely used verifiers over 307,420 verdicts. We find three things. (1) Self validation ranges from 53.8% to 95.2% on identical inputs, a spread of 41.3 points. The published figure describes one implementation, not the task; two configurations of the same library disagree on 49.9% of pairs. (2) The residual is not spread across parsing categories but concentrated in whitespace and punctuation, which account for 93.0% of in contract failures for the default LaTeX configuration. A trailing period or newline dominates the budget. (3) Separating rejection from execution failure shows that verifiers with similar aggregate error fail for opposite reasons, and that a reference numeric cascade accepts off by one wrong answers as a step function of magnitude, from 0% below 10^4 to 100% at or above, because its relative tolerance is scale invariant.
Multimodal retrievers are essential for knowledge-based visual question answering, where they retrieve external evidence for image-question pairs. However, existing contrastive training methods typically treat all unmatched query-document pairs as equally informative negatives, which is problematic because many unmatched documents may still be semantically relevant or partially useful. We propose Bayesian Data Reweighting, a probabilistic framework that models query-document importance as latent variables and adaptively infers posterior weights to downweight likely false negatives. With closed-form posterior updates under conjugate priors and stochastic EM optimization, our method consistently improves retrieval accuracy across three retrievers and seven knowledge-based VQA benchmarks.
Sara Ketabi, Matthias W. Wagner, Cynthia Hawkins +3cs.LG q-bio.QM
Multimodal Contrastive Learning (CL) has shown significant performance in aligning representations across various data modalities and improving downstream tasks, especially in healthcare. It works by minimizing the distance between matched (positive) data modalities, while maximizing the distance between mismatched (negative) samples. Traditional CL frameworks typically assume instance-based correspondence within data batches, treating all non-paired samples as negatives. However, this assumption often fails in medical settings, where samples may share high-level semantic attributes, leading to false negatives that degrade representation quality. In this paper, we propose Multimodal Semantic-Aware Contrastive Learning (MseaCL), a CL framework trained on a pediatric cohort of 3D brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and radiology reports. The goal of this framework is to mitigate the impact of semantically similar false negative samples by incorporating semantic similarity between radiology reports, as a guiding signal during the learning process. Our results indicate that applying this framework as a pretraining stage can achieve notable improvements in downstream tasks, e.g., at least a 22.6\% increase in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of pediatric brain tumor molecular classification, demonstrating its potential for more robust and semantically aligned multimodal representations in clinical applications.