CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Aug 10, 2026

Beyond Routing Weights: Faithful Response-Level Interpretation of Mixture-of-Experts Reward Models via Contribution Contrast

arXiv AI Archived Aug 10, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2608.06400v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reward models are central to learning from human preferences, yet identifying what drives their predictions remains challenging. Recent sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) reward models seek to improve interpretability by routing prompts to specialized experts and characterizing experts through examples with high routing weights. However, routing weights only reveal which prompts an expert $\textit{receives}$, not how it $\textit{judges}$ responses, pr

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 31 Jul 2026] Beyond Routing Weights: Faithful Response-Level Interpretation of Mixture-of-Experts Reward Models via Contribution Contrast Yifan Wang, Jinyi Mu, Mayank Jobanputra, Yu Wang, Soyoung Oh, Isabel Valera, Vera Demberg Reward models are central to learning from human preferences, yet identifying what drives their predictions remains challenging. Recent sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) reward models seek to improve interpretability by routing prompts to specialized experts and characterizing experts through examples with high routing weights. However, routing weights only reveal which prompts an expert receives , not how it judges responses, providing only a partial account of expert behavior. We therefore propose Co ntribution- Co ntrast ( CoCo ) response-level interpretation, which faithfully characterizes experts' roles using chosen-rejected response pairs with the largest contribution contrasts, jointly capturing routing and preference behavior. Across automatic and human evaluations, CoCo yields more coherent, faithful, and specialized interpretations than router-based, score-based, and sparse autoencoder-based alternatives while maintaining competitive reward modeling accuracy. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic study of interpretation methods for MoE reward models. Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2608.06400 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2608.06400v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.06400 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Yifan Wang [view email] [v1] Fri, 31 Jul 2026 17:43:30 UTC (66 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-08 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Aug 10, 2026
    Archived
    Aug 10, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗