When Rubrics Fail: Error Enumeration as Reward in Reference-Free RL Post-Training for Virtual Try-On

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ikezogwo, Wisdom, Seyfioglu, Mehmet Saygin, Krishna, Ranjay, Bouyarmane, Karim
Format: Preprint
Published: 2026
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866910087031816192
author Ikezogwo, Wisdom
Seyfioglu, Mehmet Saygin
Krishna, Ranjay
Bouyarmane, Karim
author_facet Ikezogwo, Wisdom
Seyfioglu, Mehmet Saygin
Krishna, Ranjay
Bouyarmane, Karim
contents Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) and Rubrics as Rewards (RaR) have driven strong gains in domains with clear correctness signals and even in subjective domains by synthesizing evaluation criteria from ideal reference answers. But many real-world tasks admit multiple valid outputs and lack the single ideal answer that rubric generation depends on. We identify this reference-free setting as a gap in current post-training methods and propose Implicit Error Counting (IEC) to fill it. Instead of checking what a response gets right against a rubric, IEC enumerates what it gets wrong, applying severity-weighted scores across task-relevant axes and converting them into calibrated per-aspect rewards. We show that naïve explicit enumeration is too noisy for stable optimization, and that two design choices: implicit score emission and group calibration are necessary to make error counting a reliable reward. As a case study, we validate IEC on virtual try-on (VTO), a domain that is simultaneously too constrained for holistic scoring and too permissive for rubric-based evaluation: subtle garment errors are unacceptable, yet many output variations are correct. We introduce Cascaded Error Counting (CEC) as an evaluation metric, which tracks human preferences well (60% top-1 vs. 30% others), and curate Mismatch-DressCode (MDressBench), a benchmark with maximal attribute mismatch to stress-test reward designs. On MDressBench, IEC outperforms RaR across all metrics (CEC: 5.31 vs. 5.60 on flat references; 5.20 vs. 5.53 on non-flat). On VITON-HD and DressCode, IEC matches or surpasses six baselines on 6 of 8 perceptual metrics. These results suggest that when ideal answers are unavailable, counting errors provide a stronger signal than constructing rubrics.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2603_05659
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle When Rubrics Fail: Error Enumeration as Reward in Reference-Free RL Post-Training for Virtual Try-On
Ikezogwo, Wisdom
Seyfioglu, Mehmet Saygin
Krishna, Ranjay
Bouyarmane, Karim
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) and Rubrics as Rewards (RaR) have driven strong gains in domains with clear correctness signals and even in subjective domains by synthesizing evaluation criteria from ideal reference answers. But many real-world tasks admit multiple valid outputs and lack the single ideal answer that rubric generation depends on. We identify this reference-free setting as a gap in current post-training methods and propose Implicit Error Counting (IEC) to fill it. Instead of checking what a response gets right against a rubric, IEC enumerates what it gets wrong, applying severity-weighted scores across task-relevant axes and converting them into calibrated per-aspect rewards. We show that naïve explicit enumeration is too noisy for stable optimization, and that two design choices: implicit score emission and group calibration are necessary to make error counting a reliable reward. As a case study, we validate IEC on virtual try-on (VTO), a domain that is simultaneously too constrained for holistic scoring and too permissive for rubric-based evaluation: subtle garment errors are unacceptable, yet many output variations are correct. We introduce Cascaded Error Counting (CEC) as an evaluation metric, which tracks human preferences well (60% top-1 vs. 30% others), and curate Mismatch-DressCode (MDressBench), a benchmark with maximal attribute mismatch to stress-test reward designs. On MDressBench, IEC outperforms RaR across all metrics (CEC: 5.31 vs. 5.60 on flat references; 5.20 vs. 5.53 on non-flat). On VITON-HD and DressCode, IEC matches or surpasses six baselines on 6 of 8 perceptual metrics. These results suggest that when ideal answers are unavailable, counting errors provide a stronger signal than constructing rubrics.
title When Rubrics Fail: Error Enumeration as Reward in Reference-Free RL Post-Training for Virtual Try-On
topic Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Artificial Intelligence
Machine Learning
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.05659