arXiv Machine Learning

Adapter Thickets: Splitting an RLVR Budget Beats Concentrating It

The paper investigates how reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) interacts with majority voting over sampled completions, a common test‑time scaling technique. It shows that training a single LoRA adapter with the full RLVR budget can improve single‑sample accuracy but often harms the overall majority‑vote performance because the policy’s errors become increasingly correlated. By splitting the same training budget across multiple adapters—each trained on a disjoint shard, forming an "adapter thicket"—the authors demonstrate that this approach consistently out‑votes the fully trained single adapter and preserves most of the single‑sample gains, especially when the number of votes is large.

arXiv AI
Jul 21

MADA-RL: Multi-Agent Debate-Aware Reinforcement Learning for Parameter-Efficient Reasoning in Compact Models

arXiv:2607. 18006v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models achieve strong reasoning performance, but often at prohibitive training cost - a challenge that is especially acute for compact models ($\leq 4 \, \mathrm{B}$ parameters) trained under limited budgets.

By Martino M. L. Pulici, Cuong Xuan Chu, Evgeny Kharlamov, Zifeng Ding, Volker Tresp, Yunpu Ma
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 29

New LoRA Skills Should Read but Never Write

The paper introduces READ, a method for composing low‑rank adapters (LoRA) in large language models. By rewriting each adapter into a balanced canonical form and enforcing a one‑directional coupling, READ allows new skills to read but never write into the output subspaces of existing skills, eliminating interference. Experiments on four benchmark suites and two model families show that READ consistently outperforms existing baselines, improving SuperGLUE scores by over twenty points and domain suite scores by more than seven points.

By Zeyan Li, Panqi Yang, Qirong Guo, Shengda Zhuo, SIyuan Qiu, Hu Xu, Chun Li, Jianfeng Xu
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 30

LoRA Scaffolded Policy Optimization (LSPO): A Sampling-Time Low-Rank Scaffold for Recovering Reinforcement-Learning Gradient on Zero-Reward Cliff Prompts

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 Machine Learning
Oct 19

Sample, Mix, or Verify? Allocating Test-Time Compute under Imperfect Verifiers

The paper introduces SPLIT, a method that optimally allocates test‑time compute among sampling, model selection, and verification for language models and agents. Using an exact probability formula that accounts for task difficulty, shared blind spots, and verifier correlations, SPLIT is fitted via empirical Bayes on a small labeled pilot and then used to plan budgets for unseen tasks. Across seven diverse benchmarks, 26 models, and six verifier types, SPLIT achieves near‑optimal performance, outperforming rule‑based baselines by up to 2.5 percentage points and providing insights into when additional LLM judges reduce precision.

By Srinivasan Iyengar
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 31

LoRA Scaffolded Policy Optimization (LSPO): A Sampling-Time Low-Rank Scaffold for Recovering Reinforcement-Learning Gradient on Zero-Reward Cliff Prompts

arXiv:2607. 27787v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: 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.

By Ken Ding
arXiv AI
Sep 10

Everything in Moderation: Per-Domain Coverage Optima and Alignment-Resistant Domain Gaps in Multi-Domain Mid-Training

The study investigates how the composition of data during the mid‑training phase of language models affects performance across multiple domains. Experiments with Qwen3‑8B‑Base on five distinct KOR‑Bench domains show that moderate coverage (10%‑40%) yields the best per‑domain results, and that alignment passes cannot fully close the performance gaps created by mid‑training data choices. Additionally, zero coverage in mid‑training severely degrades accuracy, while a carefully tuned allocation can provide the largest overall pipeline improvement.

By Yunpeng Xu, Kun Zheng
arXiv AI
Oct 2

Cross-Benchmark Transfer from RL on Agentic Coding Tasks

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.

By Sushant Mehta, Logan Ritchie, Edwin Chen
arXiv AI
Oct 15

Beyond GRPO and On-Policy Distillation: An Empirical Sparse-to-Dense Reward Principle for Language-Model Post-Training

The paper proposes a reward‑density principle for language‑model post‑training: sparse sequence‑level rewards are best for exploring and discovering new behaviors in a strong teacher, while dense token‑level teacher supervision is optimal for compressing that behavior into a smaller deployment model. The authors validate this rule with a four‑stage workflow—teacher RL, forward‑KL warmup, on‑policy distillation, and optional post‑bridge student RL—showing that an RL‑improved 8B teacher distilled through a dense bridge outperforms direct GRPO on a 1.7B student across math and code benchmarks. Ablation studies confirm each stage’s contribution, and the approach generalizes to Llama and Qwen models, offering a practical guideline for allocating scarce labeled data.

By Yuanda Xu, Hejian Sang, Zhengze Zhou, Ran He, Zhipeng Wang, Alborz Geramifard
arXiv AI
Sep 7

What Does Multi-Harness RL Learn? Credit Assignment and Portability in Coding Agents

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.

By Chenqian Le, Jiayi Cheng, Qijia He, Runhao Li, Yinghao Li, Xupeng Chen