pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21125 · v1 · pith:CZZ3PQXXnew · submitted 2026-05-20 · 💻 cs.LG

Advantage Collapse in Group Relative Policy Optimization: Diagnosis and Mitigation

Xixiang He , Qiyao Sun , Ao Cheng , Xingming Li , Xuanyu Ji , Hailun Lu , Runke Huang , Qingyong Hu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 06:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.LG
keywords advantage collapsegroup relative policy optimizationGRPOreinforcement learning from verifiable rewardsRLVRmathematical reasoningpolicy optimizationvirtual samples
0
0 comments X

The pith

Injecting virtual reward samples guided by a collapse rate metric lets GRPO learn from groups of identical answers without extra model rollouts.

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

Group Relative Policy Optimization stops making progress when every answer in a sampled group receives the same reward, because the resulting advantages drop to near zero and gradients vanish. The paper defines the Advantage Collapse Rate as the share of training batches where this occurs and demonstrates that higher rates reliably forecast stalled training and lower final accuracy on math benchmarks. To fix it they introduce Adaptive Virtual Sample Policy Optimization, which monitors the collapse rate in real time and inserts virtual reward samples into homogeneous groups. This change cuts collapse by 58-63 percent, raises accuracy by 4-6 points across model sizes from 0.5B to 14B parameters, and preserves performance on an out-of-domain task. The method requires no additional model generations beyond what GRPO already performs.

Core claim

GRPO encounters advantage collapse whenever a group of sampled answers all receive identical rewards, producing near-zero advantages and vanishing policy gradients. The Advantage Collapse Rate quantifies the fraction of batches affected by this condition and correlates strongly with training stagnation. Adaptive Virtual Sample Policy Optimization uses real-time ACR monitoring to insert virtual reward samples into homogeneous groups, restoring a usable learning signal while avoiding any extra model rollouts. On mathematical reasoning tasks this yields a 58-63 percent reduction in collapse rate and 4-6 percentage point accuracy gains that hold across model scales while generalization on the o1

What carries the argument

Advantage Collapse Rate (ACR), the fraction of batches whose rewards are uniform enough to drive advantages to zero, together with Adaptive Virtual Sample Policy Optimization (AVSPO), which adds ACR-guided virtual reward samples to restore gradient signal in homogeneous groups.

If this is right

  • Training runs can be monitored in real time for the onset of advantage collapse using the ACR metric.
  • Homogeneous reward groups no longer produce zero gradients once virtual samples are injected.
  • Accuracy gains appear consistently from 0.5B to 14B parameter models without increasing rollout cost.
  • Generalization to at least one out-of-domain task remains comparable to the GRPO baseline.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • ACR-style monitoring of gradient effectiveness could be applied to other relative advantage estimators beyond GRPO.
  • Virtual-sample injection may offer a template for handling reward sparsity or uniformity in broader RLVR pipelines.
  • Dynamic adjustment of virtual-sample frequency based on observed collapse rate could be extended to other training hyperparameters.

Load-bearing premise

That adding virtual reward samples guided by ACR does not distort the policy gradient or create systematic bias that would hurt performance outside the tested benchmarks.

What would settle it

An experiment that trains identical models with GRPO and AVSPO, then evaluates both on a broad suite of out-of-domain reasoning tasks never seen during the original training; if AVSPO accuracy falls below GRPO accuracy on those tasks the virtual-sample approach would be shown to introduce harmful bias.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21125 by Ao Cheng, Hailun Lu, Qingyong Hu, Qiyao Sun, Runke Huang, Xingming Li, Xixiang He, Xuanyu Ji.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Early ACR predicts final performance. Each point represents one training run across 245 configurations (5 model scales, 7 difficulty levels, 7 group sizes). Strong negative correla￾tion (R 2 = 0.617) between early-stage ACR and final accuracy. Points colored by model scale. cal reasoning in large language models (Shao et al., 2024; Guo et al., 2025). Unlike Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF)… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of AVSPO. The policy generates G responses per prompt with binary rewards. When all rewards are identical, GRPO’s advantages collapse to zero (A = 0). AVSPO monitors ACR in real-time; upon detecting collapse, it injects virtual samples to restore reward variance and recompute non-zero advantages (A ′ ̸= 0) for stable policy updates. in mathematical reasoning tasks where binary verification often y… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Sensitivity analysis of ACR across training conditions. Blue bars show final accuracy (left axis); red line shows ACR100 (right axis). (a) Larger models generally achieve lower ACR with higher accuracy, though not strictly monotonic. (b) Moderate temperatures (T = 0.3–0.5) balance exploration and precision. (c) Increasing group size G reduces ACR with diminishing returns. (d) Intermediate difficulty (L3–L4… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Computational overhead analysis. (a) Per-step time breakdown for GRPO training on Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B. LLM generation and input preparation dominate (>96% of total time), while reward and advantage computation account for only 0.3%. (b) Comparison between GRPO and AVSPO. AVSPO adds <0.01% overhead (∼3ms per step) for ACR monitoring and virtual sample generation, which is negligible compared to the 27.97s per… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: illustrates the prompt template employed for all training and evaluation experiments [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: ACR and accuracy training curves across model scales. Left: ACR evolution over 500 training steps (orange shades). Larger models maintain consistently lower ACR. Right: Corresponding accuracy curves on MATH-500 (blue shades). The inverse relationship between ACR and accuracy is evident across all model scales. 0 100 200 300 400 500 Training Steps 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Advantage Collapse Rate (ACR) (a) AC… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: illustrates the effect of sampling temperature on ACR dynamics. Key observations: • Temperature-ACR relationship: Lower temperatures (T = 0.1, 0.3) produce deterministic outputs leading to high ACR, while higher temperatures (T = 0.9, 1.0) maintain low ACR through increased stochasticity. • Accuracy-temperature trade-off: Despite low ACR at high temperatures, accuracy does not monotonically increase, sugge… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: ACR and accuracy training curves across group sizes. Left: ACR dynamics (orange shades) showing that larger groups reduce collapse rate. Right: Accuracy dynamics (blue shades) with diminishing returns beyond G = 6. G.3. ACR Dynamics Across Group Sizes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: ACR and accuracy training curves across dataset difficulty levels. Left: ACR dynamics (orange shades) showing that both extremes (too easy or too hard) cause high collapse rates. Right: Accuracy dynamics (blue shades) with intermediate difficulty levels providing optimal learning conditions. H. Case Studies To provide intuitive understanding of advantage collapse and the effectiveness of AVSPO, we present … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Example generations from GRPO and AVSPO on MATH-500 problems. Responses from Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B trained with GRPO (left) versus AVSPO (right) on the same problem. Both models start with similar reasoning approaches, but GRPO makes computational errors or reasoning leaps while AVSPO maintains logical consistency. Colors are added for visualization: blue indicates correct reasoning steps or answers, red indi… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Advantage collapse examples during GRPO training. Left: All-incorrect case where G = 8 responses fail on a challenging problem (σR = 0, gradient vanishes). Right: All-correct case where all responses succeed (σR = 0, gradient still vanishes). AVSPO addresses both scenarios by injecting virtual samples to restore reward variance. I. Statistical Significance Analysis To assess the robustness of our reported… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Performance distribution across 5 random seeds. Boxplots show median, quartiles, and individual data points for representative model-benchmark combinations. AVSPO (blue) consistently outperforms GRPO (gray) with non-overlapping distributions, visually confirming the statistical significance reported in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), a prominent algorithm within the Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) framework, has achieved strong results in improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, GRPO is prone to advantage collapse, a failure mode where homogeneous rewards within a group (e.g., all correct or all incorrect answers) yield near-zero advantages and vanishing gradients. To address this, we introduce the Advantage Collapse Rate (ACR), the first diagnostic metric quantifying the proportion of training batches with ineffective gradients. Across models from 0.5B to 14B parameters on mathematical reasoning benchmarks, we show that ACR strongly predicts training stagnation and final performance. We then propose Adaptive Virtual Sample Policy Optimization (AVSPO), a lightweight extension of GRPO that injects virtual reward samples, guided by real-time ACR monitoring, to enable learning from homogeneous groups without additional model rollouts. AVSPO reduces advantage collapse by 58-63% relative to GRPO and yields consistent accuracy gains of 4-6 percentage points across all model scales, while maintaining generalization on the evaluated out-of-domain task. Code and datasets are available at https://qingyonghu.github.io/AVSPO.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript diagnoses advantage collapse in Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) for LLM reasoning tasks, where homogeneous group rewards produce near-zero advantages and vanishing gradients. It introduces the Advantage Collapse Rate (ACR) metric to quantify the fraction of ineffective training batches and demonstrates its predictive power for stagnation. The authors then propose Adaptive Virtual Sample Policy Optimization (AVSPO), a lightweight GRPO extension that monitors ACR and injects virtual reward samples to enable learning from homogeneous groups without extra rollouts, reporting 58-63% ACR reduction and 4-6 percentage point accuracy gains across 0.5B-14B models on mathematical benchmarks while preserving out-of-domain generalization.

Significance. If the virtual-sample mechanism preserves unbiased gradients, AVSPO would provide a practical, low-cost stabilization technique for RLVR pipelines that are central to current LLM reasoning improvements. The multi-scale empirical evaluation and public code release are strengths that support reproducibility and potential adoption.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4] AVSPO description (Section 4): no derivation or analysis is given for how advantages are recomputed over the augmented group or whether the zero-mean property of the advantage estimator is preserved. If virtual rewards are assigned fixed heuristic values rather than drawn from the true reward distribution, the resulting advantage estimates become systematically shifted, which could explain the reported gains via altered gradient magnitude rather than genuine collapse mitigation.
  2. [Section 5] Experimental evaluation (Section 5, Tables 1-2): the 4-6 pp accuracy gains and 58-63% ACR reductions are presented without reporting variance across random seeds, sensitivity to the ACR threshold or injection rate, or explicit data-exclusion rules. This leaves open whether the improvements are robust or could arise from post-hoc tuning of the free parameter governing virtual-sample injection.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Section 3] The precise formula for ACR (e.g., as a proportion of batches with all-equal rewards) should be stated explicitly as an equation rather than described in prose.
  2. [Figures 2-3] Figure captions and axis labels in the ACR-vs-performance plots would benefit from clearer indication of whether curves aggregate multiple runs or single seeds.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment in turn below, indicating where revisions will be made to improve clarity and rigor.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 4] AVSPO description (Section 4): no derivation or analysis is given for how advantages are recomputed over the augmented group or whether the zero-mean property of the advantage estimator is preserved. If virtual rewards are assigned fixed heuristic values rather than drawn from the true reward distribution, the resulting advantage estimates become systematically shifted, which could explain the reported gains via altered gradient magnitude rather than genuine collapse mitigation.

    Authors: We agree that Section 4 currently lacks an explicit derivation of the recomputed advantages on the augmented group and an analysis of the zero-mean property. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph deriving the advantage estimator after virtual-sample injection and showing that the zero-mean property is preserved when virtual rewards are assigned the negative of the current group-mean reward. This choice ensures the augmented group mean remains zero, so the advantage estimates stay unbiased. We will also clarify that the heuristic is not arbitrary but is chosen precisely to avoid systematic shifts in gradient magnitude. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Section 5] Experimental evaluation (Section 5, Tables 1-2): the 4-6 pp accuracy gains and 58-63% ACR reductions are presented without reporting variance across random seeds, sensitivity to the ACR threshold or injection rate, or explicit data-exclusion rules. This leaves open whether the improvements are robust or could arise from post-hoc tuning of the free parameter governing virtual-sample injection.

    Authors: The referee correctly observes that variance across seeds, sensitivity analyses, and explicit data-exclusion rules are not reported. We will revise Section 5 to include standard deviations computed over three independent random seeds for all main results in Tables 1 and 2. We will also add an ablation subsection examining performance sensitivity to the ACR threshold and the virtual-sample injection rate, together with a clear statement of the data-exclusion criteria applied during training and evaluation. These additions will allow readers to assess robustness directly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; empirical validation of new metric and extension remains independent

full rationale

The paper defines ACR as a diagnostic proportion of batches with near-zero advantages and introduces AVSPO as an empirical extension that injects virtual samples when ACR is high. Reported reductions in ACR (58-63%) and accuracy gains (4-6 pp) are measured outcomes on held-out benchmarks across model scales, not quantities algebraically forced by the definitions or by any fitted parameters within the same work. No equations equate the final performance claims to inputs by construction, no self-citation chain bears the central result, and the released code provides an external reproducibility check. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 0 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claims rest on the empirical observation that homogeneous reward groups cause vanishing advantages and on the modeling choice that virtual samples can be injected without changing the underlying reward distribution in a harmful way. No new physical or mathematical axioms are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • virtual sample injection rate or threshold
    The frequency or condition under which virtual samples are added is chosen based on real-time ACR and is not derived from first principles.
invented entities (2)
  • Advantage Collapse Rate (ACR) no independent evidence
    purpose: Diagnostic metric to quantify proportion of batches with ineffective gradients
    New quantity defined in the paper to track the failure mode.
  • Adaptive Virtual Sample Policy Optimization (AVSPO) no independent evidence
    purpose: Algorithmic extension that injects virtual reward samples
    New procedure introduced to mitigate the diagnosed collapse.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5767 in / 1399 out tokens · 26920 ms · 2026-05-21T06:05:17.191697+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · 12 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    M-grpo: Stabilizing self-supervised reinforcement learning for large language models with momentum-anchored policy optimization

    Bai, B., Wu, H., Ye, P., and Chen, T. M-grpo: Stabilizing self-supervised reinforcement learning for large language models with momentum-anchored policy optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.13070, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Curriculum learning

    Bengio, Y., Louradour, J., Collobert, R., and Weston, J. Curriculum learning. In ICML, 2009

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    C., Obando-Ceron, J., Li, L., Bacon, P.-L., Berseth, G., Courville, A., and Castro, P

    Castanyer, R. C., Obando-Ceron, J., Li, L., Bacon, P.-L., Berseth, G., Courville, A., and Castro, P. S. Stable gradients for stable learning at scale in deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.15544, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems

    Cobbe, K., Kosaraju, V., Bavarian, M., Chen, M., Jun, H., Kaiser, L., Plappert, M., Tworek, J., Hilton, J., Nakano, R., et al. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168, 2021

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    X., and Wen, J.-R

    Deng, J., Chen, J., Chen, Z., Zhao, W. X., and Wen, J.-R. Decomposing the entropy-performance exchange: The missing keys to unlocking effective reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.02260, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Principled data selection for alignment: The hidden risks of difficult examples

    Gao, C., Li, H., Liu, L., Xie, Z., Zhao, P., and Xu, Z. Principled data selection for alignment: The hidden risks of difficult examples. In ICML, 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    L., and Baxter, J

    Greensmith, E., Bartlett, P. L., and Baxter, J. Variance reduction techniques for gradient estimates in reinforcement learning. JMLR, 5: 0 1471--1530, 2004

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

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

    Guo, D., Yang, D., Zhang, H., Song, J., Zhang, R., Xu, R., Zhu, Q., Ma, S., Wang, P., Bi, X., et al. Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    S., and Keerthi, S

    Gupta, A., Tang, S., Song, Q., Zhu, S., Hong, J., Saha, A., Gupta, V., Lee, N., Kim, E., Zhu, S., Agrawal, P., Pillai, N. S., and Keerthi, S. S. Alphapo: Reward shape matters for LLM alignment. In ICML, 2025

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    LightEval: A Lightweight Framework for LLM Evaluation

    Habib, N., Fourrier, C., Kydl\' i c ek, H., Wolf, T., and Tunstall, L. LightEval: A Lightweight Framework for LLM Evaluation . https://github.com/huggingface/lighteval, 2023

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    L., Shen, J., Hu, J., Han, X., Huang, Y., Zhang, Y., et al

    He, C., Luo, R., Bai, Y., Hu, S., Thai, Z. L., Shen, J., Hu, J., Han, X., Huang, Y., Zhang, Y., et al. Olympiadbench: A challenging benchmark for promoting agi with olympiad-level bilingual multimodal scientific problems. In ACL, 2024

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Vl norm: Rethink loss aggregation in rlvr

    He, Z., Luo, X., Zhang, Y., Yang, Y., and Qiu, L. Vl norm: Rethink loss aggregation in rlvr. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.07558, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    A., Pezeshki, M., Dohmatob, E., Bordes, F., Astolfi, P., Hall, M., Verbeek, J., Drozdzal, M., and Romero-Soriano, A

    Hemmat, R. A., Pezeshki, M., Dohmatob, E., Bordes, F., Astolfi, P., Hall, M., Verbeek, J., Drozdzal, M., and Romero-Soriano, A. Improving the scaling laws of synthetic data with deliberate practice. In ICML, 2025

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Deep reinforcement learning that matters

    Henderson, P., Islam, R., Bachman, P., Pineau, J., Precup, D., and Meger, D. Deep reinforcement learning that matters. In AAAI, 2018

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Measuring mathematical problem solving with the MATH dataset

    Hendrycks, D., Burns, C., Kadavath, S., Arora, A., Basart, S., Tang, E., Song, D., and Steinhardt, J. Measuring mathematical problem solving with the MATH dataset. In NeurIPS, 2021

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    T1 : Advancing language model reasoning through reinforcement learning and inference scaling

    Hou, Z., Lv, X., Lu, R., Zhang, J., Li, Y., Yao, Z., Li, J., Tang, J., and Dong, Y. T1 : Advancing language model reasoning through reinforcement learning and inference scaling. In ICML, 2025

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    REINFORCE++: Stabilizing Critic-Free Policy Optimization with Global Advantage Normalization

    Hu, J., Liu, J. K., Xu, H., and Shen, W. Reinforce++: Stabilizing critic-free policy optimization with global advantage normalization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03262, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Lambert, N., Morrison, J., Pyatkin, V., Huang, S., Ivison, H., Brahman, F., Miranda, L. J. V., Liu, A., Dziri, N., Lyu, S., et al. Tulu 3: Pushing frontiers in open language model post-training. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.15124, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    and Zhang, T

    Langford, J. and Zhang, T. The epoch-greedy algorithm for multi-armed bandits with side information. In NeurIPS, 2007

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

    Sharpness-Guided Group Relative Policy Optimization via Probability Shaping

    Le, T., Van, L. N., and Le, T. Sharpness-guided group relative policy optimization via probability shaping. arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.00066, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    V., Jeon, M., Vu, K., Lai, V., and Yang, E

    Le, T.-L. V., Jeon, M., Vu, K., Lai, V., and Yang, E. No prompt left behind: Exploiting zero-variance prompts in llm reinforcement learning via entropy-guided advantage shaping. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.21880, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Solving quantitative reasoning problems with language models

    Lewkowycz, A., Andreassen, A., Dohan, D., Dyer, E., Michalewski, H., Ramasesh, V., Slone, A., Anil, C., Schlag, I., Gutman-Solo, T., et al. Solving quantitative reasoning problems with language models. In NeurIPS, 2022

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    Adaptive group policy optimization: Towards stable training and token-efficient reasoning

    Li, C., Liu, N., and Yang, K. Adaptive group policy optimization: Towards stable training and token-efficient reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15952, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Let's verify step by step

    Lightman, H., Kosaraju, V., Burda, Y., Edwards, H., Baker, B., Lee, T., Leike, J., Schulman, J., Sutskever, I., and Cobbe, K. Let's verify step by step. In ICLR, 2024

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    Understanding R1-Zero-Like Training: A Critical Perspective

    Liu, Z., Chen, C., Li, W., Qi, P., Pang, T., Du, C., Lee, W. S., and Lin, M. Understanding r1-zero-like training: A critical perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20783, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.06639 , year=

    Mroueh, Y. Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards: Grpo's effective loss, dynamics, and success amplification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.06639, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Ngrpo: Negative-enhanced group relative policy optimization

    Nan, G., Chen, S., Huang, J., Lu, M., Wang, D., Xie, C., Xiong, W., Zeng, X., Zhou, Q., Li, Y., and Xu, X. Ngrpo: Negative-enhanced group relative policy optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.18851, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., Schulman, J., Hilton, J., Kelton, F., Miller, L., Simens, M., Askell, A., Welinder, P., Christiano, P

    Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., Schulman, J., Hilton, J., Kelton, F., Miller, L., Simens, M., Askell, A., Welinder, P., Christiano, P. F., Leike, J., and Lowe, R. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. In NeurIPS, 2022

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Maximizing confidence alone improves reasoning

    Prabhudesai, M., Chen, L., Ippoliti, A., Fragkiadaki, K., Liu, H., and Pathak, D. Maximizing confidence alone improves reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.22660, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Riedmiller, M., Hafner, R., Lampe, T., Neunert, M., Degrave, J., Van de Wiele, T., Mnih, V., Heess, N., and Springenberg, J. T. Learning by playing solving sparse reward tasks from scratch. In ICML, 2018

    work page 2018

  31. [31]

    Hybrid group relative policy optimization: A multi-sample approach to enhancing policy optimization

    Sane, S. Hybrid group relative policy optimization: A multi-sample approach to enhancing policy optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01652, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    High-Dimensional Continuous Control Using Generalized Advantage Estimation

    Schulman, J., Moritz, P., Levine, S., Jordan, M., and Abbeel, P. High-dimensional continuous control using generalized advantage estimation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.02438, 2015

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  33. [33]

    Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms

    Schulman, J., Wolski, F., Dhariwal, P., Radford, A., and Klimov, O. Proximal policy optimization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  34. [34]

    DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models

    Shao, Z., Wang, P., Zhu, Q., Xu, R., Song, J., Bi, X., Zhang, H., Zhang, M., Li, Y., Wu, Y., et al. Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reasoning in open language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    On entropy control in llm-rl algorithms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.03493,

    Shen, H. On entropy control in llm-rl algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.03493, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    F., Akter, S., and Sharma, A

    Shihab, I. F., Akter, S., and Sharma, A. Detecting proxy gaming in rl and llm alignment via evaluator stress tests. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.05619, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    TRL: Transformers Reinforcement Learning

    von Werra, L., Belkada, Y., Tunstall, L., Beeching, E., Thrush, T., Lambert, N., Huang, S., Rasul, K., and Gallouédec, Q. TRL: Transformers Reinforcement Learning . https://github.com/huggingface/trl, 2020

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    SCOPE-RL: Stable and Quantitative Control of Policy Entropy in RL Post-Training

    Wang, C., Li, Z., Bai, J., Zhang, Y., Cui, S., Zhao, Z., and Wang, Y. Arbitrary entropy policy optimization breaks the exploration bottleneck of reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08141, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Mmlu-pro: A more robust and challenging multi-task language understanding benchmark

    Wang, Y., Ma, X., Zhang, G., Ni, Y., Chandra, A., Guo, S., Ren, W., Arulraj, A., He, X., Jiang, Z., et al. Mmlu-pro: A more robust and challenging multi-task language understanding benchmark. In NeurIPS, 2024

    work page 2024

  40. [40]

    Bapo: Stabilizing off-policy reinforcement learning for llms via balanced policy optimization with adaptive clipping

    Xi, Z., Guo, X., Nan, Y., Zhou, E., Shen, J., Chen, W., Liu, J., Huang, J., Zhang, Z., Guo, H., et al. Bapo: Stabilizing off-policy reinforcement learning for llms via balanced policy optimization with adaptive clipping. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.18927, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Qwen2.5 Technical Report

    Yang, A., Yang, B., Zhang, B., Hui, B., Zheng, B., Yu, B., et al. Qwen2.5 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.15115, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    Your group-relative advantage is biased

    Yang, F., Chen, Z., Wang, X., Lu, X., Chai, J., Yin, G., Lin, W., Ma, S., Zhuang, F., Wang, D., Yang, Y., Li, J., and Ban, Y. Your group-relative advantage is biased. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.08521, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    Dcpo: Dynamic clipping policy optimization

    Yang, S., Dou, C., Guo, P., Lu, K., Ju, Q., Deng, F., and Xin, R. Dcpo: Dynamic clipping policy optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.02333, 2025 a

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Do not let low-probability tokens over-dominate in rl for llms

    Yang, Z., Luo, X., Wang, Z., Han, D., He, Z., Li, D., and Xu, Y. Do not let low-probability tokens over-dominate in rl for llms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.12929, 2025 b

    work page arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    DAPO : An open-source LLM reinforcement learning system at scale

    Yu, Q., Zhang, Z., Zhu, R., Yuan, Y., Zuo, X., Yue, Y., Dai, W., Fan, T., Liu, G., Liu, L., et al. DAPO : An open-source LLM reinforcement learning system at scale. In NeurIPS, 2026

    work page 2026

  46. [46]

    and Zuo, C

    Zhang, J. and Zuo, C. GRPO-LEAD: A difficulty-aware reinforcement learning approach for concise mathematical reasoning in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.09696, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Edge-grpo: Entropy-driven grpo with guided error correction for advantage diversity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.21848,

    Zhang, X., Wen, S., Wu, W., and Huang, L. EDGE-GRPO: entropy-driven GRPO with guided error correction for advantage diversity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.21848, 2025 a

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Scaf-grpo: Scaffolded group relative policy optimization for enhancing llm reasoning

    Zhang, X., Wu, S., Zhu, Y., Tan, H., Yu, S., He, Z., and Jia, J. Scaf-grpo: Scaffolded group relative policy optimization for enhancing llm reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.19807, 2025 b

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    Learning to Reason without External Rewards

    Zhao, X., Kang, Z., Feng, A., Levine, S., and Song, D. Learning to reason without external rewards. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.19590, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    Stabilizing reinforcement learning with llms: Formulation and practices.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.01374, 2025a

    Zheng, C., Dang, K., Yu, B., Li, M., Jiang, H., et al. Stabilizing reinforcement learning with llms: Formulation and practices. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.01374, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025