The paper evaluates the true benefit of verifier‑based reinforcement learning (RLVR) over supervised fine‑tuning (SFT) using a deterministic benchmark of 1,877 synthetic GPU and LLM training failure diagnosis tasks. In controlled experiments, SFT alone achieved high performance (0.785 on the hard split), while RLVR added no detectable improvement in‑distribution and only a modest gain under distribution shift (+0.33 points). The study concludes that most performance gains come from SFT, with verifier‑based RL contributing only small additional benefits.
arXiv:2609.06107v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Data policies for reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) determine which rollouts are used, how strongly they are weighted, and which do...
The paper reports that applying reinforcement learning (RL) to the Kimi K2.7 Code model on 1,700 agentic coding tasks improves its performance on six external benchmarks. After a single epoch of GSPO training on a rank‑32 LoRA adapter, pass‑@1 scores increased across all benchmarks, with significant gains even on data released after training. The trained model also reduces agent steps and avoids common failure modes such as dropping requirements or breaking existing behavior.
The paper introduces SymCE, a dataset of 4,707 false undergraduate‑algebra and real‑analysis conjectures each paired with a deterministic Python verifier that can be executed to check truth. It studies counterexample generation by training a 4B‑parameter language model (Qwen3‑4B) first with supervised fine‑tuning and then with reinforcement learning (GRPO) using the verifier as a reward. The results show that counterexample‑only fine‑tuning can destroy true‑theorem recognition, while reinforcement learning with a sparse outcome‑only reward restores and surpasses baseline performance, achieving higher success rates than larger open‑weight models and competitive performance on other math benchmarks. "whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that reinforcement learning guided by a per‑theorem verifier can effectively repair the shortcomings of supervised fine‑tuning in theorem proving, offering a practical approach to improve language models’ mathematical reasoning capabilities."
arXiv:2606. 14629v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Verifier-driven self-DPO is a common recipe for self-improving production visual-language models.
arXiv:2608. 00220v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We show that on-policy reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) can improve the current objective while making successful behaviors for later objectives too rare to sample and reinforce.
The study investigates how multi‑harness reinforcement learning (RL) affects coding agents by comparing two grouping strategies—Within (one group per task‑harness pair) and Cross (harnesses pooled within a task)—using a Qwen3‑8B policy trained on frozen task‑harness records from Aider, OpenHands, Qwen Code, and SWE‑agent. Across 24,000 sealed evaluations, the choice of evaluation harness dramatically increases solve rates (from 2.14 % to 9.27 %), while the grouping rule has a negligible effect. Both grouping rules yield similar gains on the same source harness, and Cross‑harness credit does not improve portability beyond Within‑harness credit, suggesting that multi‑harness RL reports should specify grouping boundaries and test on unseen harnesses.
Reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) for mathematical reasoning suffers from a structural blind spot: on "cliff" prompts-those on which every sampled rollout in a group fails-the group-normalized advantage is identically zero, so GRPO produces no gradient on precisely the prompts at the frontier of the model's capability. We introduce LoRA Scaffolded Policy Optimization (LSPO), a sampling-time mechanism that recovers this lost gradient.
arXiv:2607.09709v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Post-training a code generator against a learned judge can optimize proxy features that raise the score without improving the artifact. We study th...
arXiv:2607. 17136v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic computer-use RL is reported in single runs, and those numbers mislead.
arXiv:2610.20497v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) trains language models from checked task outcomes, but assigning a terminal reward to individual...
arXiv:2608.23830v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: RL has emerged as a powerful paradigm for enhancing the instruction following capabilities of LLMs. While existing training recipes achieve substanti...
arXiv:2606. 26997v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) post-training for reasoning increasingly relies on reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), where models learn from ground-truth feedback on mathematical, logical, and scientific tasks.