Paper detail

Grounding Multi-Hop Reasoning in Structural Causal Models via Group Relative Policy Optimization

Multi-Hop Fact Verification (MHFV) necessitates complex reasoning across disparate evidence, posing significant challenges for Large Language Models (LLMs) which often suffer from hallucinations and fractured logical chains. Existing methods, while improving transparency via Chain-of-Thought (CoT), lack explicit modeling of the causal dependencies between evidence and claims. In this work, we introduce a novel framework that grounds reasoning in a Structural Causal Model (SCM), treating verification as a constructive causal inference process. We empirically identify an "inverted U-shaped" correlation between reasoning chain length and accuracy, revealing that excessive structural complexity degrades performance. To address this, we propose a Rule-based Reinforcement Learning strategy using Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). This approach dynamically optimizes the trade-off between structural depth and conciseness. Extensive experiments on HoVer and EX-FEVER demonstrate that our SCM-GRPO framework significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, offering a reliable and interpretable solution for complex fact verification.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.