arXiv:2606. 00914v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly act after consuming ranked external information streams such as social feeds, search results, retrieval contexts, and email queues, yet safety evaluations almost always test the model or the user prompt in isolation, never the upstream ranker that decides what the agent reads just before it acts.
By Rana Muhammad Usman
arXiv:2606. 25556v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Stepwise group-based RL is an attractive way to train long-horizon LLM agents without a learned critic: it reuses multiple sampled rollouts to estimate local advantages.
By Hanyang Wang, Weijieying Ren, Yuxiang Zhang, Ding Cao, Zhizhao Zeng, Ke Zeng, Tianxiang Zhao
arXiv:2608. 13179v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) offers a verifier-bounded performance ceiling for training multi-turn tool-use agents, yet its trajectory-level credit assignment conflates heterogeneous per-turn outcomes into a single reward signal.
By Zechuan Wang, Siyuan Lu, Hongxuan Zhang, Linjian Mo, Chenyi Zhuang, Leilei Gan
arXiv:2608. 19760v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Audited against causal ground truth from executed replay in a single-agent tool environment (ALFWorld), none of the step-level credit signals used to train LLM agents -- LLM-judge scores, outcome-conditioned logprob ratios, or the policy's own confidence -- identifies which steps causally matter better than chance.
By Haiyue Zhang
arXiv:2607. 11022v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The test suites used as RLVR rewards for code have natural false positives: per-task, persistent, asymmetric errors that accept the same wrong programs every time they appear, unlike the symmetric or resampled noise assumed by existing noise-robustness analyses.
By Chuyifei Zhang
arXiv:2606. 05932v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) improves reasoning even when the reward signal is spurious -- assigning credit to the group-plurality answer rather than a ground-truth verifier.
By Yuze Gao
arXiv:2607. 21273v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Dense per-step supervision is the standard remedy for sparse-reward long-horizon LLM agents: reward the policy for predicting its next observation, which looks provably safe under potential-based shaping.
By Yu Wang
arXiv:2607. 17136v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic computer-use RL is reported in single runs, and those numbers mislead.
By Barada Sahu (Cabal AI), Shivesh Pandey (Para AI)
arXiv:2608.21501v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Credit assignment in large-language-model reinforcement learning (LLM RL) can be separated into three objects: evidence about success, a transport oper...
By Qifan Shi, Zhaolu Kang, Chenghua Zhu
arXiv:2608. 13564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating language-model agents at scale increasingly relies on a second language model as an automatic judge, because the gold signal, an executable environment reward, is expensive, slow, or unavailable at deployment time.
By Darragh Quinn, David Dylan, Roisin Healy, Fionn Carroll, Maeve Donnelly, Cormac Sheehan
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:2606. 29476v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Self-distilled agentic reinforcement learning augments trajectory-level reward with a token-level distillation loss, using as its teacher the same policy conditioned on privileged context.
By Zibin Meng, Kani Chen