What pass@k Cannot Measure: Evaluating Diversity and Capability Retention after Post-Training
Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →The paper critiques the use of pass@$k$ as a sole metric for evaluating reinforcement‑learning post‑training on language models, showing that it ignores diversity in model outputs. Experiments on Qwen2.5‑1.5B‑Instruct trained with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) and rejection‑sampling fine‑tuning (RFT) reveal that these methods shift token‑level, answer‑level, and unique‑answer diversity in opposite directions, yet pass@$k$ fails to capture these differences. Even when restricting to verifier‑correct completions, diversity gaps persist, and pass@$k$ does not consistently identify the better performing arm on hard problem subsets, indicating that the metric can mask true capability changes.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.