Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Learning to Reason for Long-Form Story Generation

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2503.22828 v2 pith:DJILDCWE submitted 2025-03-28 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords reasoningstoryacrosschaptersgenerationlearninglong-formreason
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Generating high-quality stories spanning thousands of tokens requires competency across a variety of skills, from tracking plot and character arcs to keeping a consistent and engaging style. Due to the difficulty of sourcing labeled datasets and precise quality measurements, most work using large language models (LLMs) for long-form story generation uses combinations of hand-designed prompting techniques to elicit author-like behavior. This is a manual process that is highly dependent on the specific story-generation task. Motivated by the recent success of applying RL with Verifiable Rewards to domains like math and coding, we propose a general story-generation task (Next-Chapter Prediction) and a reward formulation (Verified Rewards via Completion Likelihood Improvement) that allows us to use an unlabeled book dataset as a learning signal for reasoning. We learn to reason over a story's condensed information and generate a detailed plan for the next chapter. Our reasoning is evaluated via the chapters it helps a story-generator create, and compared against non-trained and supervised finetuning (SFT) baselines. Pairwise human judgments reveal the chapters our learned reasoning produces are preferred across almost all metrics, and the effect is more pronounced in Scifi and Fantasy genres.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Can Large Language Models Develop Strategic Reasoning? Post-training Insights from Learning Chess

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Training LLMs with dense chess rewards improves puzzle accuracy but plateaus around 25-30%, far below expert level, because the base models lack internal chess knowledge.

  2. PlotTwist: A Creative Plot Generation Framework with Small Language Models

    cs.CL 2026-03 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    PlotTwist aligns a 3B-active-parameter model with DPO to generate movie plots that its own Qwen-3-32B agentic evaluator scores above GPT-4.1, Claude Sonnet 4, and Gemini 2.0 Flash.

  3. Scalpel vs. Hammer: GRPO Amplifies Existing Capabilities, SFT Replaces Them

    cs.LG 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    GRPO produces modest math gains with small knowledge loss, while SFT gives larger math gains but degrades knowledge benchmarks more, with parameter analyses suggesting the loss comes from larger mid-layer MLP updates.

Pith tools