arxiv: 2605.09931 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · 💻 cs.CL · cs.AI

Recognition: no theorem link

PruneTIR: Inference-Time Tool Call Pruning for Effective yet Efficient Tool-Integrated Reasoning

Luan Zhang , Dandan Song , Zhijing Wu , Zhengyu Chen , Chen Zhang , Yuhang Tian , Huipeng Ma , Chenhao Li

show 3 more authors

Changzhi Zhou Xudong Li Shuhao Zhang

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 04:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CL cs.AI

keywords tool-integrated reasoninginference-time pruningtool call pruningLLM reasoningerror mitigationcontext length reductionagentic systemspass@1 improvement

0 comments

The pith

PruneTIR prunes erroneous tool calls during inference to improve accuracy and reduce context length in tool-using LLMs.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The authors observe that the number and proportion of wrong tool calls during inference negatively correlate with whether the final answer is correct. They also note that these errors usually get fixed in a few turns or persist indefinitely. From these patterns they derive PruneTIR, which uses three rules to drop completed paths, resample from stuck states, and suspend tool use after repeated failures. This lets already capable models reach more correct answers while using less context and fewer steps. A reader would care because the method requires no retraining and directly addresses a common failure mode in current tool-augmented systems.

Core claim

PruneTIR enhances tool-integrated reasoning at inference time through Success-Triggered Pruning, Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling, and Retry-Triggered Tool Suspension. These components prune trajectories based on success, handle stuck erroneous calls by resampling, and suspend tool usage after retries to avoid prolonged failures, leading to higher Pass@1 scores, better efficiency, and shorter contexts.

What carries the argument

The trio of Success-Triggered Pruning, Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling, and Retry-Triggered Tool Suspension that together prune bad trajectories and prevent endless error loops.

Load-bearing premise

The negative correlation between erroneous tool calls and answer correctness, along with the pattern that errors resolve quickly or not at all, holds across different LLMs, tasks, and tool sets.

What would settle it

Experiments on a new model or tool set showing that applying the three pruning components produces no gain in Pass@1 or no reduction in context length would falsify the effectiveness claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.09931 by Changzhi Zhou, Chenhao Li, Chen Zhang, Dandan Song, Huipeng Ma, Luan Zhang, Shuhao Zhang, Xudong Li, Yuhang Tian, Zhengyu Chen, Zhijing Wu.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Overview of PRUNETIR. PRUNETIR consists of three components: (i) Success-Triggered Pruning (STP), which prunes the error-resolution trace upon a successful solution, (ii) Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling (STPR), which prunes the trace and resamples a new tool call if the LLM fails to resolve the erroneous call within a fixed number of turns, and (iii) Retry–Triggered Tool Suspension (RTTS), which tem… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Prompt template for manual reasoning. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Sensitivity analysis of Turn Limit and Retry Limit for Qwen3-8B on AIME24. thereby improving Pass@1. However, overly increasing Turn Limit can degrade performance, as Algorithm 1 may accumulate noisy information that distracts reasoning. Meanwhile, increasing Try Limit encourages broader exploration and helps the LLM avoid becoming stuck, thereby improving Pass@1. However, an excessively large Try Limit … view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Average number of error turns before success [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Error type distribution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: A Case from AIME24 Illustrating Degradation in LLMs’ Reasoning Ability. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: A Case from AIME24 Demonstrating LLMs Getting Stuck. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Prompt template for judgment. is carried forward, thereby alleviating long-horizon challenges (Sun et al., 2025; Ye et al., 2025). This is particularly beneficial for tasks involving long tool-use trajectories. Moreover, to further validate the effectiveness of our proposed PRUNETIR, we compare it with the chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning optimization approach, Self-Consistency (Wang et al., 2023). Self-Co… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Tool-integrated reasoning (TIR) enables large language models (LLMs) to enhance their capabilities by interacting with external tools, such as code interpreters (CI). Most recent studies focus on exploring various methods to equip LLMs with the ability to use tools. However, how to further boost the reasoning ability of already tool-capable LLMs at inference time remains underexplored. Improving reasoning at inference time requires no additional training and can help LLMs better leverage tools to solve problems. We observe that, during tool-capable LLM inference, both the number and the proportion of erroneous tool calls are negatively correlated with answer correctness. Moreover, erroneous tool calls are typically resolved successfully within a few subsequent turns. If not, LLMs often struggle to resolve such errors even with many additional turns. Building on the above observations, we propose PruneTIR, a rather effective yet efficient framework that enhances the tool-integrated reasoning at inference time. During LLM inference, PruneTIR prunes trajectories, resamples tool calls, and suspends tool usage through three components: Success-Triggered Pruning, Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling, and Retry-Triggered Tool Suspension. These three components enable PruneTIR to mitigate the negative impact of erroneous tool calls and prevent LLMs from getting stuck in repeated failed resolution attempts, thereby improving overall LLM performance. Extensive experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of PruneTIR, which significantly improves Pass@1 and efficiency while reducing the working context length for tool-capable LLMs.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

PruneTIR gives a practical set of inference-time rules to drop bad tool calls, but the supporting observations look too tied to their own runs to trust yet.

read the letter

PruneTIR turns two observations about tool-using LLMs into three simple rules: prune trajectories once a successful tool call appears, resample when the model gets stuck on an error, and suspend tool use after repeated failed retries. The rules aim to shorten context and raise final answer quality without any extra training or fine-tuning. That combination of triggers is the concrete new piece; earlier tool-use papers have mostly focused on training or better prompting rather than these runtime cuts. The motivation is straightforward and the efficiency angle matters for anyone running agents in production. The heuristics follow directly from the stated patterns in error behavior, so the logic is easy to follow on paper. The main weakness is that the observations themselves come from the same experimental distribution used to measure the gains. If the negative link between erroneous calls and correctness, or the quick-resolution pattern, is specific to their models, tasks, or tool set, then the pruning steps could remove useful paths or leave harmful ones in place. The abstract claims clear lifts in Pass@1 and reduced context length, yet supplies no numbers, baselines, or ablation tables, so it is impossible to judge how large or stable the effect actually is. This work is aimed at people already building or tuning tool-augmented LLM systems who want cheap inference tweaks. A reader focused on agent reliability or runtime optimization would pick up usable ideas even if the results need more checking. I would send it to peer review. The idea is clear enough and the problem is real, but the referees will have to press on generalization and demand the full experimental details before the claims can be taken at face value.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces PruneTIR, an inference-time framework for tool-integrated reasoning in LLMs. It is motivated by two observations: the number/proportion of erroneous tool calls negatively correlates with final answer correctness, and such errors are typically resolved successfully within a few turns or not at all. Building on these, PruneTIR applies three heuristic components—Success-Triggered Pruning, Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling, and Retry-Triggered Tool Suspension—to prune bad trajectories, resample calls, and suspend tool use, claiming significant gains in Pass@1 accuracy, efficiency, and reduced working context length without any training.

Significance. If the underlying observations prove robust and generalizable, PruneTIR offers a lightweight, training-free way to improve the reliability and efficiency of tool-using LLMs on reasoning tasks. The focus on reducing context length and avoiding stuck states is practically valuable for deployment, and the heuristic design makes it easy to adopt. However, the significance is tempered by the post-hoc nature of the motivating observations.

major comments (2)

[Observations / §3] The two core observations (negative correlation with correctness; quick resolution or permanent failure) are presented as the foundation for the three pruning rules, yet they appear derived from the same experimental distribution used to measure PruneTIR's gains. This creates a circularity risk: the heuristics may be tuned to patterns specific to the tested LLMs, tasks, and tool sets (e.g., code interpreter), so that the reported Pass@1 and efficiency improvements do not generalize. The manuscript should include explicit held-out validation or cross-model/task ablations to establish that the patterns are not artifacts of the evaluation setup.
[Experiments / §5] The experimental claims of 'significantly improves Pass@1 and efficiency' rest on the effectiveness of the three components, but without reported ablations isolating each rule's contribution or statistical tests across multiple runs, it is difficult to confirm that the gains are robust rather than driven by particular hyperparameter choices or task distributions. This directly affects the central claim that PruneTIR mitigates erroneous calls in a general way.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract would be strengthened by including at least one quantitative result (e.g., Pass@1 delta or context-length reduction) to ground the 'significantly improves' claim.
[Method / §4] Clarify the precise decision thresholds (e.g., exact number of turns that counts as 'stuck' or 'a few subsequent turns') in the three components so that the method is fully reproducible.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and the recommendation for major revision. We have reviewed the concerns regarding potential circularity in our motivating observations and the need for stronger experimental validation. We address each point below and commit to revisions that incorporate additional analyses to enhance the manuscript's rigor.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Observations / §3] The two core observations (negative correlation with correctness; quick resolution or permanent failure) are presented as the foundation for the three pruning rules, yet they appear derived from the same experimental distribution used to measure PruneTIR's gains. This creates a circularity risk: the heuristics may be tuned to patterns specific to the tested LLMs, tasks, and tool sets (e.g., code interpreter), so that the reported Pass@1 and efficiency improvements do not generalize. The manuscript should include explicit held-out validation or cross-model/task ablations to establish that the patterns are not artifacts of the evaluation setup.

Authors: We acknowledge the risk of circularity, as the observations in Section 3 were derived from analyses on the primary evaluation distributions. To address this directly, we will add held-out validation experiments and cross-model/task ablations in the revised manuscript. These will test the pruning rules on unseen tasks, different LLMs, and alternative tool sets to confirm that the patterns and resulting gains generalize beyond the original setup. revision: yes
Referee: [Experiments / §5] The experimental claims of 'significantly improves Pass@1 and efficiency' rest on the effectiveness of the three components, but without reported ablations isolating each rule's contribution or statistical tests across multiple runs, it is difficult to confirm that the gains are robust rather than driven by particular hyperparameter choices or task distributions. This directly affects the central claim that PruneTIR mitigates erroneous calls in a general way.

Authors: We agree that component-level ablations and statistical validation are necessary to substantiate the robustness of the claims. In the revision, we will include detailed ablations isolating the contribution of each of the three components (Success-Triggered Pruning, Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling, and Retry-Triggered Tool Suspension). We will also report results from multiple independent runs with appropriate statistical tests (such as mean and standard deviation across runs) to demonstrate that the Pass@1 and efficiency improvements are consistent and not attributable to specific hyperparameter or task choices. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: heuristics derived from stated observations, not from fitted parameters or self-referential definitions

full rationale

The paper presents two empirical observations (negative correlation between erroneous tool calls and correctness; quick resolution or permanent failure of errors) as the basis for three heuristic components (Success-Triggered Pruning, Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling, Retry-Triggered Tool Suspension). These observations are described as direct measurements during inference rather than quantities defined in terms of the target Pass@1 metric or derived via equations. No mathematical derivations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text. The method is a set of rule-based interventions justified by the observations and then evaluated experimentally; the chain does not reduce to its inputs by construction. This is the common case of an empirical heuristic framework with independent content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, mathematical axioms, or new postulated entities are introduced; the contribution consists of three algorithmic heuristics whose correctness rests on empirical observations stated in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5615 in / 1096 out tokens · 34733 ms · 2026-05-12T04:37:46.144387+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Revisiting Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards from a Contrastive Perspective
cs.LG 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

ConSPO improves RLVR training by aligning rollout scores with generation likelihoods via length-normalized log-probabilities and applying a group-wise InfoNCE contrastive loss with a scheduled margin, outperforming GR...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 12 internal anchors

[1]

OpenAI o1 System Card

Openai o1 system card , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16720 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[2]

DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning

Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[3]

Qwen3 Technical Report

Qwen3 technical report , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09388 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[4]

Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

work page
[5]

Cohen , title =

Wenhu Chen and Xueguang Ma and Xinyi Wang and William W. Cohen , title =. Trans. Mach. Learn. Res. , volume =. 2023 , url =

work page 2023
[6]

The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations,

Ke Wang and Houxing Ren and Aojun Zhou and Zimu Lu and Sichun Luo and Weikang Shi and Renrui Zhang and Linqi Song and Mingjie Zhan and Hongsheng Li , title =. The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations,. 2024 , url =

work page 2024
[7]

ReTool: Reinforcement Learning for Strategic Tool Use in LLMs

Retool: Reinforcement learning for strategic tool use in llms , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.11536 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[8]

2025 , publisher=

Qwq-32b: Embracing the power of reinforcement learning , author=. 2025 , publisher=

work page 2025
[9]

Kimi k1.5: Scaling Reinforcement Learning with LLMs

Kimi k1. 5: Scaling reinforcement learning with llms , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12599 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[10]

Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages=

Start: Self-taught reasoner with tools , author=. Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages=

work page 2025
[11]

Gemini: A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Models

Gemini: a family of highly capable multimodal models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.11805 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[12]

Qwen2.5 Technical Report

An Yang and Baosong Yang and Beichen Zhang and Binyuan Hui and Bo Zheng and Bowen Yu and Chengyuan Li and Dayiheng Liu and Fei Huang and Haoran Wei and Huan Lin and Jian Yang and Jianhong Tu and Jianwei Zhang and Jianxin Yang and Jiaxi Yang and Jingren Zhou and Junyang Lin and Kai Dang and Keming Lu and Keqin Bao and Kexin Yang and Le Yu and Mei Li and Mi...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.15115 2024
[13]

Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models

Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[14]

Vicuna: An open-source chatbot impressing gpt-4 with 90\ author =

work page
[15]

Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks

Program of thoughts prompting: Disentangling computation from reasoning for numerical reasoning tasks , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.12588 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[16]

International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=

Pal: Program-aided language models , author=. International Conference on Machine Learning , pages=. 2023 , organization=

work page 2023
[17]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.19201 , year=

Understanding tool-integrated reasoning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.19201 , year=

work page arXiv
[18]

Search-R1: Training LLMs to Reason and Leverage Search Engines with Reinforcement Learning

Search-r1: Training llms to reason and leverage search engines with reinforcement learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.09516 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[19]

R1-Searcher: Incentivizing the Search Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning

R1-searcher: Incentivizing the search capability in llms via reinforcement learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.05592 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[20]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.08190

MARIO: MAth Reasoning with code Interpreter Output--A Reproducible Pipeline , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.08190 , year=

work page arXiv
[21]

The eleventh international conference on learning representations , year=

React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models , author=. The eleventh international conference on learning representations , year=

work page
[22]

and Liang, J

Chain of code: Reasoning with a language model-augmented code emulator , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.04474 , year=

work page arXiv
[23]

Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , pages=

Creator: Tool creation for disentangling abstract and concrete reasoning of large language models , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , pages=

work page 2023
[24]

The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations,

Zhibin Gou and Zhihong Shao and Yeyun Gong and Yelong Shen and Yujiu Yang and Minlie Huang and Nan Duan and Weizhu Chen , title =. The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations,. 2024 , url =

work page 2024
[25]

Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages=

Agentic reasoning: A streamlined framework for enhancing llm reasoning with agentic tools , author=. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages=

work page
[26]

Dotamath: Decomposition of thought with code assistance and self-correction for mathematical reasoning

Dotamath: Decomposition of thought with code assistance and self-correction for mathematical reasoning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.04078 , year=

work page arXiv
[27]

Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025 , pages=

SMART: Self-aware agent for tool overuse mitigation , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025 , pages=

work page 2025
[28]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

Advancing tool-augmented large language models: Integrating insights from errors in inference trees , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

work page
[29]

Sim- pletir: End-to-end reinforcement learning for multi-turn tool-integrated reasoning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.02479,

Simpletir: End-to-end reinforcement learning for multi-turn tool-integrated reasoning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.02479 , year=

work page arXiv
[30]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.07773 , year=

Agent rl scaling law: Agent rl with spontaneous code execution for mathematical problem solving , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.07773 , year=

work page arXiv
[31]

Torl: Scaling tool-integrated rl, 2025 b

Torl: Scaling tool-integrated rl , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.23383 , year=

work page arXiv
[32]

Tool-star: Empowering llm- brained multi-tool reasoner via reinforcement learn- ing.arXiv:2505.16410, 2025

Tool-Star: Empowering LLM-Brained Multi-Tool Reasoner via Reinforcement Learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.16410 , year=

work page arXiv
[33]

arXiv e-prints , pages=

Otc: Optimal tool calls via reinforcement learning , author=. arXiv e-prints , pages=

work page
[34]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.23285 , year=

Toward Effective Tool-Integrated Reasoning via Self-Evolved Preference Learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.23285 , year=

work page arXiv
[35]

Agentic reasoning and tool integration for llms via reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.01441,

Agentic reasoning and tool integration for llms via reinforcement learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.01441 , year=

work page arXiv
[36]

ToolRL: Reward is All Tool Learning Needs

Toolrl: Reward is all tool learning needs , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.13958 , year=

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[37]

Agent0: Unleashing self-evolving agents from zero data via tool-integrated reasoning

Agent0: Unleashing Self-Evolving Agents from Zero Data via Tool-Integrated Reasoning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.16043 , year=

work page arXiv
[38]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.24480 , year=

Towards Effective Code-Integrated Reasoning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.24480 , year=

work page arXiv
[39]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.11184 , year=

Can Tool-Integrated Reinforcement Learning Generalize Across Diverse Domains? , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.11184 , year=

work page arXiv
[40]

An empirical study on eliciting and improving r1-like reasoning models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.04548, 2025

An empirical study on eliciting and improving r1-like reasoning models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.04548 , year=

work page arXiv
[41]

Scaling long-horizon LLM agent via context-folding.CoRR, abs/2510.11967, 2025

Scaling long-horizon llm agent via context-folding , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.11967 , year=

work page arXiv
[42]

Agentfold: Long-horizon web agents with proactive context management.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.24699, 2025

AgentFold: Long-Horizon Web Agents with Proactive Context Management , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.24699 , year=

work page arXiv
[43]

Hugging Face repository , howpublished =

ByteDance-Seed , title =. Hugging Face repository , howpublished =. 2025 , publisher =

work page 2025
[44]

Le and Ed H

Xuezhi Wang and Jason Wei and Dale Schuurmans and Quoc V. Le and Ed H. Chi and Sharan Narang and Aakanksha Chowdhery and Denny Zhou , title =. The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations,. 2023 , url =

work page 2023
[45]

Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the

Dan Hendrycks and Collin Burns and Saurav Kadavath and Akul Arora and Steven Basart and Eric Tang and Dawn Song and Jacob Steinhardt , editor =. Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the. Proceedings of the Neural Information Processing Systems Track on Datasets and Benchmarks 1, NeurIPS Datasets and Benchmarks 2021, December 2021, virtual , year =

work page 2021
[46]

First conference on language modeling , year=

Gpqa: A graduate-level google-proof q&a benchmark , author=. First conference on language modeling , year=

work page
[47]

Adhint: Adaptive hints with difficulty priors for reinforcement learning, 2026

ADHint: Adaptive Hints with Difficulty Priors for Reinforcement Learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.13095 , year=

work page arXiv