arXiv Machine Learning By Patrick Wilhelm, Odej Kao

Where Should RL Post-Training Compute Go? Model Size, Search, Learning, and Feedback

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

arXiv:2607. 13389v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement Learning (RL) post-training is increasingly used to adapt foundation models for reasoning, planning, and feedback-driven robot-learning pipelines, but constrained post-training resources are often summarized by a single total FLOP budget.

Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 30

Early Verdicts, Better Budgets: Sequential Adaptive Rollout Allocation for Compute-Efficient RLVR

arXiv:2607. 26253v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is bottlenecked by rollout generation, yet many sampled prompts produce saturated groups (all responses correct or all incorrect) whose zero reward variance yields no policy-gradient signal.

By Pixel Nomand, Elena Voss, Marcus Hale, Sofia Reyes
arXiv AI
Jun 19

Connect the Dots: Training LLMs for Long-Lifecycle Agents with Cross-Domain Generalization Via Reinforcement Learning

arXiv:2606. 20002v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This work presents a general framework for training large language models (LLMs) to "Connect the Dots" (CoD), a meta-capability required by long-lifecycle agents: as an LLM-based AI agent gets deployed in an environment, it solves a long sequence of tasks while continuously exploring the environment, learning from its own experiences, and iteratively self-updating its context about the environment, thereby achieving progressively better performance on future tasks conditioned on the updated context.

By Yanxi Chen, Weijie Shi, Yuexiang Xie, Boyi Hu, Yaliang Li, Bolin Ding, Jingren Zhou
arXiv AI
Jul 23

In-the-Flow Agentic System Optimization for Effective Planning and Tool Use

arXiv:2510. 05592v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Outcome-driven reinforcement learning has advanced reasoning in large language models (LLMs), but prevailing tool-augmented approaches train a single, monolithic policy that interleaves thoughts and tool calls under full context; this scales poorly with long horizons and diverse tools and generalizes weakly to new scenarios.

By Zhuofeng Li, Haoxiang Zhang, Seungju Han, Sheng Liu, Jianwen Xie, Yu Zhang, Yejin Choi, James Zou, Pan Lu