Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 77 references

AgentOPSD: Recursive Self-Distillation for Agentic Reinforcement Learning

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that a turn's credit in long-horizon agentic reinforcement learning should be the marginal revision of a recursively updated Bayesian belief in eventual success, and presents AgentOPSD, a critic-free method that reshapes…

desk verdict A fresh and broadly tested turn-level credit assignment method whose empirical promise outruns its formal justification; the appendix overclaims what the theory actually shows. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05987 v1 pith:ETLMTPQU submitted 2026-08-06 cs.AI cs.LG

Zi-Han Wang , Zhengxi Lu , Zhiyuan Yao , Jinyang Wu , Jie Wu , Zhengzhou Cai , Yueqing Sun , Ziang Ye
show 5 more authors
Linji Hao Qi Gu Xunliang Cai Yongliang Shen Yujiu Yang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.AIcs.LG
keywords agenticreinforcementlearningcreditassignmentself-distillationBayesianbeliefupdatelog-oddsspaceturn-levelGRPOlong-horizonagents
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

In long-horizon agentic tasks the only verifiable reward arrives at the end, so standard group-relative RL broadcasts one trajectory-level advantage to every token and cannot tell a decisive turn from a routine one. The paper's central claim is that a turn's credit should be the marginal revision of a recursively updated belief in eventual success: what matters is not the local teacher–student gap in isolation but how much that gap changes the estimated probability that the trajectory will succeed. AgentOPSD implements this by aggregating token-level self-distillation gaps into turn-level evidence, accumulating that evidence in log-odds space with geometric decay, and using the belief revision to reshape the GRPO advantage per turn. The method needs no critic and no additional rollouts, and the paper reports consistent gains over GRPO and self-distillation baselines on ALFWorld, WebShop, and Search-QA with Qwen2.5-3B and 7B, including 89.1% success on ALFWorld with Qwen2.5-7B.

What carries the argument

The central object is a recursively updated Bayesian success belief $B_k$ maintained in log-odds space. The identity that carries the argument is the approximation connecting the turn-level teacher–student contrast $e_k = \log \frac{\pi_\theta(a_k \mid s_k, c^+)}{\pi_\theta(a_k \mid s_k)}$ to the ideal Bayes factor $\log \frac{p(a_k \mid s_k, C)}{p(a_k \mid s_k, \neg C)}$, so that accumulating $e_k$ with geometric decay and reading off $\Delta B_k = B_k - B_{k-1}$ converts a sparse terminal reward into history-dependent per-turn credit. The mechanism also includes a bounded reshaping block that standardizes the outcome-aligned credit $q_k = \mathrm{sign}(A_{\mathrm{seq}}) \Delta B_k$ and multiplies the group-relative advantage by a factor in $[1-b, 1+b]$, preserving the verifier's sign and recovering GRPO exactly when $\lambda = 0$.

What would settle it

Collect a sample of trajectories from a long-horizon environment at a trained checkpoint, and for each turn estimate the true belief increment $\mathrm{logit}\, p(C \mid s_k, a_k) - \mathrm{logit}\, p(C \mid s_k)$ by Monte Carlo rollouts from $s_k$ and $s_{k+1}$, or from a trusted value model; compare its sign and rank against the AgentOPSD proxy $e_k$. A success-rate regime near 89% where sign agreement drops materially below the rare-success regime would show the approximation breaks exactly where the method is used, while sign agreement across the regime would confirm the assumed transfer.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that a local self-distillation gap is not, by itself, sequential credit. The credit of turn $k$ is the belief revision $\Delta B_k = B_k - B_{k-1}$, where $B_k = \sigma(\ell_k)$ is the posterior probability of eventual success obtained by recursively updating a prior $B_0$ (the group success rate) with turn-level evidence $e_k = \sum_t [\log \pi_\theta(y_{k,t} \mid s_k, c^+) - \log \pi_\theta(y_{k,t} \mid s_k)]$ in log-odds space, $\ell_k = \mathrm{logit}(B_0) + \sum_{j \le k} \gamma^{k-j} e_j$. The teacher branch conditioned on a training-only retrieved skill supplies the evidence; the verifier supplies the global direction; and the reshaped advantage $\tilde A_k = A_{\mathrm{seq}} ((1-\lambda) + \lambda \, \mathrm{clip}(1 + b z_k, 1-b, 1+b))$ redistributes the trajectory-level signal across turns without ever reversing its sign.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that each turn's teacher–student gap carries the same sign and ranking as the true measure of how much that turn raises the odds of eventual success; the paper proves this only when success is rare, yet the method is deployed at high success rates such as 89.1% on ALFWorld, and no proof transfers the guarantee to the accumulated belief revision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The reported gains over GRPO and self-distillation baselines across ALFWorld, WebShop, and Search-QA at two model scales show that belief-revision credit beats both uniform broadcast and local-gap reweighting.
  • The improvement grows with horizon: on ALFWorld with Qwen2.5-7B, AgentOPSD loses only 0.54 success points per extra turn, while GRPO loses 2.91 and RLSD loses 3.59.
  • Credit assignment in this style requires no learned critic and no extra rollouts; one detached teacher forward pass per turn plus elementwise belief updates suffices.
  • The mechanism ablation attributes the gains to turn-boundary aggregation, recursive revision, the outcome-aligned sign, and the empirical group-success-rate prior, with the sign and the prior contributing most.
  • At $\lambda = 0$ the reshaped advantage reduces exactly to GRPO, so AgentOPSD is a strict generalization of GRPO, with the reshaping strength controlled by a single knob.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial extension: the same belief accumulator could consume evidence from sources other than self-distillation, such as process reward models or Monte-Carlo value estimates, since the mechanism only needs a signed per-turn evidence value; the paper does not test these sources.
  • Editorial extension: the belief state $B_k$ could double as a stopping rule, because once it saturates near 0 or 1, marginal revisions vanish and further turns add little credit; the paper leaves this unexplored.
  • Editorial extension: the sign/rank approximation could be validated directly in a simulator with estimable per-turn success probabilities, separating the approximation's validity from the end-task gains.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes AgentOPSD, a critic-free, turn-level credit assignment method for agentic reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards. The method aggregates token-level teacher–student log-probability gaps into turn-level evidence, recursively accumulates this evidence in a log-odds belief state initialized from the group success rate, and reshapes each trajectory-level GRPO advantage by the belief revision ΔB_k (Eqs. 2–12). Experiments on ALFWorld, WebShop, and Search-QA with Qwen2.5-3B and 7B compare AgentOPSD against GRPO and several self-distillation baselines, reporting 89.1% success on ALFWorld with Qwen2.5-7B and ablations indicating that the recursive belief update, the signed direction, and the prior anchor each contribute to the result.

Significance. If the reported gains are robust, AgentOPSD would be a useful and inexpensive method for dense credit assignment in long-horizon agentic RL, requiring no learned critic and no extra rollouts. The paper has real strengths: a broad evaluation across three environments and two model scales, detailed disclosure of hyperparameters (Table 3), a public code link, and a systematic ablation study. However, the central theoretical justification is incomplete and the empirical claim of consistent outperformance is not supported by the reported numbers, so at present the contribution is a promising heuristic rather than a validated principled method.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A.1 / Algorithm 1 / Eqs. (8)–(11)] Appendix A.1 (Eq. (16)) claims that the self-teacher contrast e_k preserves the ranking of the ideal Bayes factor B_k and states that "AgentOPSD uses e_k only through this sign and ranking." This is not correct. The transformation e_k = B_k - log(1 - ρ_k + ρ_k e^{B_k}) depends on ρ_k = p(C|s_k), which varies across turns, so monotonicity in B_k holds only for fixed ρ_k. For example, with ρ_1=0.999 and B_1=10, e_1≈0.001, whereas ρ_2=0.001 and B_2=0.1 gives e_2≈0.099, reversing the ordering of B_1 and B_2. More importantly, Algorithm 1 (lines 13–18) and Eqs. (8)–(11) use the magnitude of e_k: e_k is accumulated into c_k, appears in ΔB_k and q_k, and is standardized before forming the bounded multiplier w_k. The ablation in Table 2 (belief revision vs raw e_k: 89.1 vs 82.8) confirms that the method is magnitude-sensitive. The alternative route in Eq. (7) is exact only if the skill-conditioned branch matches p(a_k|s_k,C) (assumption A1), which is not verified. The formal Bayesian grounding is therefore not established; please either prove the needed sign/rank property under varying ρ_k and show it transfers to ΔB_k, or explicitly re-frame the recursion as an empirically motivated heuristic.
  2. [Abstract / Section 3.2 / Table 1] The abstract and Section 3.2 claim that AgentOPSD "consistently outperforms" GRPO and strong self-distillation baselines. The numbers in Table 1 do not support that wording. On WebShop with Qwen2.5-7B, AgentOPSD Succ = 79.7, below SDAR's 82.8; on Search-QA with Qwen2.5-3B, AgentOPSD MuSiQue = 14.4, below GRPO's 15.4. Several other per-dataset cells are within 0.5 points (e.g., Search-QA 7B average 49.2 vs 49.0). Please correct the claim to reflect the actual per-cell comparisons or provide a formal statistical test demonstrating consistent improvement.
  3. [Table 1 / Section 3.1] Table 1 reports a single run per setting with no seeds, error bars, or significance tests. The headline differences are often small (e.g., 89.1 vs 85.9 in Table 2; 49.2 vs 49.0 on Search-QA 7B), so it is not possible to assess whether the reported gains are systematic rather than noise. Please provide standard errors or confidence intervals over at least three seeds for the main results and the component ablations, or otherwise justify the use of single runs.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.1] The paragraph introducing Eq. (1) appears to contain missing text: "At turn k, it samples where πθ is current policy" is not a complete sentence. Please rephrase.
  2. [Table 1] Several rows in Table 1 are garbled, for example "GRPO+OPSD100 82.485.7 75.070.0 60.0 81.2". Please reformat the table so numbers are clearly separated.
  3. [Appendix A.2 vs Section 2.3] Proposition 7 is cited in Eq. (8) before it is stated in Appendix A.2. Either move the proposition to Section 2.3 or add a forward reference.
  4. [Figure 3 caption] The caption says shaded bands show "local ±1 standard deviation," but it is not stated whether this is across seeds, across tasks, or across steps. Please clarify.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the credit signal is an explicit modeling choice, and the central claims are tested against external baselines and ablations.

full rationale

AgentOPSD's credit signal is defined, not derived, as a belief revision: Eq. (8) sets B_k = sigma(logit(B0) + sum gamma^(k-j) e_j), and Eq. (9) defines Delta B_k = B_k - B_{k-1}. The teacher-student gap e_k is the input, and the reshaped advantage in Eq. (11) is a deterministic function of that input. This is a design choice rather than a circular reduction: the paper does not fit a parameter to a target quantity and then claim to predict that quantity. B0 is set to the group success rate, which is also the GRPO group mean, but this is an initialization anchor, not a fitted parameter that forces the reported success rates. Hyperparameters (lambda, gamma, b) are swept and disclosed, and the main results are compared against GRPO, SDAR, StepOPSD, RLSD, and other baselines under shared budgets. Self-citations to the authors' prior SDAR work are present, but they serve as baselines and context, not as load-bearing uniqueness theorems or as substitutes for the empirical evaluation. One genuine weakness, flagged per the review rules, is that Appendix A.1 claims 'AgentOPSD uses e_k only through this sign and ranking,' which is contradicted by Algorithm 1: e_k magnitudes enter c_k in Eq. (8), affect Delta B_k nonlinearly, and are standardized in Eq. (11). The sign/rank preservation argument also assumes fixed rho_k, while rho_k varies across turns in the reported high-success regime. This is a correctness/validity gap in the theoretical justification, but it is not circularity: the derivation does not assume the conclusion it is meant to establish. The paper's empirical claims remain independently testable and are not equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method rests on the assumptions that the skill-conditioned teacher approximates success-conditional behavior (A1) and that the marginal policy is failure-dominated when success is rare (A2), both stated in Appendix A.1. The hyperparameters lambda, gamma, b, and epsilon_high were chosen by sweeping on the evaluation tasks. The belief state B0 is set to the group success rate, which is data-derived. No new physical entities are introduced; the belief state is a formal construct, not a new particle or force.

free parameters (4)
  • lambda (reshaping weight) = 0.5
    Swept over {0.5, 0.25, 0.1, 0.01}; 0.5 chose as best on ALFWorld and Search-QA.
  • gamma (evidence decay) = 0.95
    Swept over {1.0, 0.95, 0.9, 0.8}; results are insensitive, mild setting chosen.
  • b (multiplier band) = 0.2
    Fixed without a dedicated sweep; bounds the reshaping multiplier to [0.8, 1.2].
  • epsilon_high (policy clip upper bound) = 0.24
    Swept over {0.2, 0.24, 0.28}; value has little effect on results.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption A1: The skill-conditioned branch is success-conditional, pi_theta(a_k | s_k, c+) is approximately p(a_k | s_k, C).
    Stated in Appendix A.1 and used to equate the self-teacher contrast with the ideal Bayes factor.
  • domain assumption A2: When success is rare (rho_k small), the marginal policy is failure-dominated, pi_theta(a_k | s_k) is approximately p(a_k | s_k, not C).
    Stated in Appendix A.1; it is the rho_k to 0 limit that makes e_k recover the Bayes factor.
  • domain assumption Retrieved skill c+ from the external SkillBank meaningfully conditions the teacher branch toward successful behavior.
    The entire evidence signal e_k depends on this conditioning being informative for the task at hand.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AgentOPSD: Recursive Self-Distillation for Agentic Reinforcement Learning." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ETLMTPQU

@misc{pith2026260805987,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AgentOPSD: Recursive Self-Distillation for Agentic Reinforcement Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ETLMTPQU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05987}
}
read the original abstract

Reinforcement learning (RL) with verifiable rewards constructs trajectory-level advantage estimates, yet it often fails to credit the few pivotal decisions that determine outcomes in long-horizon, multi-turn agentic tasks. Recent work introduces privileged self-distillation for credit assignment, providing denser supervision, but it remains unclear how such local signals should represent sequential credit. We propose AgentOPSD, a critic-free, recursive method for turn-level credit assignment in agentic reinforcement learning. AgentOPSD aggregates token-level teacher-student log-probability gaps into turn-level evidence and recursively updates a Bayesian belief state in log-odds space. This yields a principled reweighting scheme that converts sparse outcome supervision into turn-level credit signals and identifies pivotal turns through the marginal belief revision between consecutive states. The method is fully compatible with standard policy optimization and requires neither an additional critic nor extra rollouts. We evaluate AgentOPSD on ALFWorld, WebShop, and Search-QA using Qwen2.5 models at two scales (3B and 7B). AgentOPSD outperforms GRPO and strong self-distillation baselines, achieving 89.1% success on ALFWorld with Qwen2.5-7B. Ablation studies attribute the gains to turn-level aggregation and history-dependent recursive belief updates.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05987 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Training dynamics and horizon-robustness of AgentOPSD on Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct / ALFWorld. (a) Validation success rate over training. (b) Sensitivity to task horizon: success points lost per extra turn (OLS slope of per-sub-task success against the measured mean turns of successful episodes). (c) Policy entropy over training. 1 INTRODUCTION Agentic post-training has become an important approach to improving the abilit… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of AgentOPSD. Left: the agent loop, interacting with the environment over turns 1, . . . , K. Middle: AgentOPSD converts GRPO’s single sequence-level advantage into turn￾level reshaped advantages in three steps: (1) aggregate the token-level teacher–student gaps δk,t within a turn into a turn-level gap ek; (2) recursively update a belief state Bk (initialized from the group success rate) and read off its ma… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Hyperparameter sensitivity of AgentOPSD. Rows: ALFWorld (Qwen2.5-7B), Search￾QA (Qwen2.5-3B), and ALFWorld (Qwen2.5-3B). Columns sweep one knob (λ, γ, ϵhigh) with the others held at our setting. Curves are rolling means; shaded bands show the local ±1 standard deviation. recursion is not particularly sensitive to how fast old evidence is discounted. We use the mild setting γ=0.95 for all main results. Policy clippin… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Teacher–Student Gap ¯δ when training Qwen2.5-3B and Qwen2.5-7B on ALFWorld, WebShop and Search-QA. H PROMPT Figures 6–8 present the full prompt templates used by AgentOPSD for the three evaluation envi￾ronments, where {skill context} is populated with the retrieved ski…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Reward Curve when training Qwen2.5-3B and Qwen2.5-7B on ALFWorld, WebShop and Search-QA. Prompt of AgentOPSD on ALFWorld You are an expert agent operating in the ALFRED Embodied Environment. Your task is to: {task description}. {skill context} Prior to this step, you h…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Prompt template used by AgentOPSD for the ALFWorld task environment. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Prompt template used by AgentOPSD for the Search-based QA task environment. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Prompt template used by AgentOPSD for the WebShop task environment. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2026 , eprint=

    TCOD: Exploring Temporal Curriculum in On-Policy Distillation for Multi-turn Autonomous Agents , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  2. [2]

    2026 , eprint=

    Self-Distilled RLVR , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  3. [3]

    2026 , eprint=

    Rethinking On-Policy Distillation of Large Language Models: Phenomenology, Mechanism, and Recipe , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  4. [4]

    2026 , eprint=

    SkillRL: Evolving Agents via Recursive Skill-Augmented Reinforcement Learning , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  5. [5]

    2026 , eprint=

    Skill-SD: Skill-Conditioned Self-Distillation for Multi-turn LLM Agents , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  6. [6]

    2026 , eprint=

    SKILL0: In-Context Agentic Reinforcement Learning for Skill Internalization , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    work page 2026

  7. [7]

    2026 , eprint=

    TIP: Token Importance in On-Policy Distillation , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  8. [8]

    2026 , eprint=

    Reinforcement Learning via Self-Distillation , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

Show all 77 references
  1. [9]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Webshop: Towards scalable real-world web interaction with grounded language agents , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

  2. [10]

    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=

  3. [11]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.03768 , year=

    Alfworld: Aligning text and embodied environments for interactive learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.03768 , year=

    2010 arXiv

  4. [12]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.09516 , year=

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

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , volume=

    Natural questions: a benchmark for question answering research , author=. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  6. [14]

    Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages=

    Triviaqa: A large scale distantly supervised challenge dataset for reading comprehension , author=. Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) , pages=

  7. [15]

    Proceedings of the 61st annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (volume 1: Long papers) , pages=

    When not to trust language models: Investigating effectiveness of parametric and non-parametric memories , author=. Proceedings of the 61st annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (volume 1: Long papers) , pages=

  8. [16]

    Proceedings of the 2018 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing , pages=

    HotpotQA: A dataset for diverse, explainable multi-hop question answering , author=. Proceedings of the 2018 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing , pages=

    2018

  9. [17]

    Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics , pages=

    Constructing a multi-hop qa dataset for comprehensive evaluation of reasoning steps , author=. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics , pages=

  10. [18]

    Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , volume=

    MuSiQue: Multi-hop Questions via Single-hop Question Composition , author=. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , volume=

  11. [19]

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

    Measuring and narrowing the compositionality gap in language models , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , pages=

    2023

  12. [20]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.10978 , year=

    Group-in-group policy optimization for llm agent training , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.10978 , year=

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.03533 , year=

    Text embeddings by weakly-supervised contrastive pre-training , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.03533 , year=

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948 , year=

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

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300 , year=

    Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reasoning in open language models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300 , year=

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    2026 , eprint=

    Self-Distilled Reasoner: On-Policy Self-Distillation for Large Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  17. [25]

    Machine learning: a probabilistic perspective , author=

  18. [26]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09388 , year=

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

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.20534 , year=

    Kimi k2: Open agentic intelligence , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.20534 , year=

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

    Ui-r1: Enhancing efficient action prediction of gui agents by reinforcement learning , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume=

  21. [29]

    Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025 , pages=

    Tool learning in the wild: Empowering language models as automatic tool agents , author=. Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025 , pages=

    2025

  22. [30]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06261 , year=

    Gemini 2.5: Pushing the frontier with advanced reasoning, multimodality, long context, and next generation agentic capabilities , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06261 , year=

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16725 , year=

    Longcat-flash-thinking-2601 technical report , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16725 , year=

  24. [32]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276 , year=

    Gpt-4o system card , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276 , year=

    arXiv

  25. [33]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

    Hugginggpt: Solving ai tasks with chatgpt and its friends in hugging face , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

  26. [34]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.06770 , year=

    Swe-bench: Can language models resolve real-world github issues? , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.06770 , year=

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.19849 , year=

    Agentic reinforced policy optimization , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.19849 , year=

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    2026 , eprint=

    On-Policy Context Distillation for Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  29. [37]

    2026 , eprint=

    Learning beyond Teacher: Generalized On-Policy Distillation with Reward Extrapolation , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  30. [38]

    2026 , eprint=

    Self-Distillation Zero: Self-Revision Turns Binary Rewards into Dense Supervision , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  31. [39]

    2026 , eprint=

    MiMo-V2-Flash Technical Report , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  32. [40]

    2026 , eprint=

    GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineering , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  33. [41]

    2026 , eprint=

    Embarrassingly Simple Self-Distillation Improves Code Generation , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  34. [42]

    2023 , eprint=

    Weak-to-Strong Generalization: Eliciting Strong Capabilities With Weak Supervision , author=. 2023 , eprint=

    2023

  35. [43]

    2011 , eprint=

    A Reduction of Imitation Learning and Structured Prediction to No-Regret Online Learning , author=. 2011 , eprint=

    2011

  36. [44]

    2026 , eprint=

    HDPO: Hybrid Distillation Policy Optimization via Privileged Self-Distillation , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  37. [45]

    2019 , eprint=

    Learning by Cheating , author=. 2019 , eprint=

    2019

  38. [46]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.15144 , year=

    Mobile-agent-v3: Fundamental agents for gui automation , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.15144 , year=

    arXiv

  39. [47]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16291 , year=

    Voyager: An open-ended embodied agent with large language models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16291 , year=

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    2024 , eprint=

    On-Policy Distillation of Language Models: Learning from Self-Generated Mistakes , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    2024

  41. [49]

    2026 , eprint=

    MiniLLM: On-Policy Distillation of Large Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  42. [50]

    2023 , eprint=

    f-Divergence Minimization for Sequence-Level Knowledge Distillation , author=. 2023 , eprint=

    2023

  43. [51]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14476 , year=

    Dapo: An open-source llm reinforcement learning system at scale , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14476 , year=

    arXiv

  44. [52]

    2026 , eprint=

    UI-Copilot: Advancing Long-Horizon GUI Automation via Tool-Integrated Policy Optimization , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  45. [53]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.03048 , year=

    CoBA-RL: Capability-Oriented Budget Allocation for Reinforcement Learning in LLMs , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.03048 , year=

  46. [54]

    2026 , eprint=

    Skill1: Unified Evolution of Skill-Augmented Agents via Reinforcement Learning , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  47. [55]

    2026 , eprint=

    StepOPSD: Step-Aware Online Preference Distillation for Agent Reinforcement Learning , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  48. [56]

    2026 , eprint=

    Privileged Information Distillation for Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  49. [57]

    2017 , eprint=

    Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms , author=. 2017 , eprint=

    2017

  50. [58]

    2016 , eprint=

    High-Dimensional Continuous Control Using Generalized Advantage Estimation , author=. 2016 , eprint=

    2016

  51. [59]

    2019 , eprint=

    RUDDER: Return Decomposition for Delayed Rewards , author=. 2019 , eprint=

    2019

  52. [60]

    2024 , eprint=

    VinePPO: Refining Credit Assignment in RL Training of LLMs , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    2024

  53. [61]

    2025 , eprint=

    Process Reinforcement through Implicit Rewards , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  54. [62]

    Journal of the American Statistical Association , volume=

    Bayes Factors , author=. Journal of the American Statistical Association , volume=. 1995 , doi=

    1995

  55. [63]

    The Annals of Mathematical Statistics , volume=

    Sequential Tests of Statistical Hypotheses , author=. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics , volume=. 1945 , doi=

    1945

  56. [64]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.14777 , year=

    SEED: Self-Evolving On-Policy Distillation for Agentic Reinforcement Learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.14777 , year=

    arXiv

  57. [65]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.26790 , year=

    OPID: On-Policy Skill Distillation for Agentic Reinforcement Learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.26790 , year=

    arXiv

  58. [66]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.26784 , year=

    SkillRise: Agentic Reinforcement Learning for Cross-Task Skill Evolution , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.26784 , year=

    arXiv

  59. [67]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.15155 , year=

    Self-distilled agentic reinforcement learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.15155 , year=

    arXiv

  60. [68]

    Artificial Intelligence , volume =

    Planning and Acting in Partially Observable Stochastic Domains , author =. Artificial Intelligence , volume =. 1998 , doi =

    1998

  61. [69]

    Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications , volume =

    Optimal Control of Markov Processes with Incomplete State Information I , author =. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications , volume =. 1965 , doi =

    1965

  62. [70]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.07594 , year=

    Learning to self-verify makes language models better reasoners , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.07594 , year=

  63. [71]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.16143 , year=

    Look Before You Leap: Autonomous Exploration for LLM Agents , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.16143 , year=

    arXiv

  64. [72]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.14050 , year=

    Understanding Multilingualism in Mixture-of-Experts LLMs: Routing Mechanism, Expert Specialization, and Layerwise Steering , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.14050 , year=

  65. [73]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.24846 , year=

    Tiny Brains, Giant Impact: Uncovering the Keystone Neurons of LLM with Just a Few Prompts , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.24846 , year=

    arXiv

  66. [74]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.16153 , year=

    Memento: Fine-tuning llm agents without fine-tuning llms , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.16153 , year=

    arXiv

  67. [75]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.04141 , year=

    Reducing tool hallucination via reliability alignment , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.04141 , year=

    arXiv

  68. [76]

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

    Alignment for efficient tool calling of large language models , author=. Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages=

    2025

  69. [77]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.11543 , year=

    Ui-s1: Advancing gui automation via semi-online reinforcement learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.11543 , year=

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.