RL in Name Only? Analyzing the Structural Assumptions in RL post-training for LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.13697v1
• Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 19:57:15 GMT
• Title: RL in Name Only? Analyzing the Structural Assumptions in RL post-training for LLMs
• Authors: Soumya Rani Samineni, Durgesh Kalwar, Karthik Valmeekam, Kaya Stechly, Subbarao Kambhampati,
• Abstract summary: Reinforcement learning-based post-training of large language models (LLMs) has recently gained attention.<n>We critically examine the formulation and assumptions underlying these methods.
• Score: 14.78605805191225
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Reinforcement learning-based post-training of large language models (LLMs) has recently gained attention, particularly following the release of DeepSeek R1, which applied GRPO for fine-tuning. Amid the growing hype around improved reasoning abilities attributed to RL post-training, we critically examine the formulation and assumptions underlying these methods. We start by highlighting the popular structural assumptions made in modeling LLM training as a Markov Decision Process (MDP), and show how they lead to a degenerate MDP that doesn't quite need the RL/GRPO apparatus. The two critical structural assumptions include (1) making the MDP states be just a concatenation of the actions-with states becoming the context window and the actions becoming the tokens in LLMs and (2) splitting the reward of a state-action trajectory uniformly across the trajectory. Through a comprehensive analysis, we demonstrate that these simplifying assumptions make the approach effectively equivalent to an outcome-driven supervised learning. Our experiments on benchmarks including GSM8K and Countdown using Qwen-2.5 base models show that iterative supervised fine-tuning, incorporating both positive and negative samples, achieves performance comparable to GRPO-based training. We will also argue that the structural assumptions indirectly incentivize the RL to generate longer sequences of intermediate tokens-which in turn feeds into the narrative of "RL generating longer thinking traces." While RL may well be a very useful technique for improving the reasoning abilities of LLMs, our analysis shows that the simplistic structural assumptions made in modeling the underlying MDP render the popular LLM RL frameworks and their interpretations questionable.

Related papers

• Revisiting LLM Reasoning via Information Bottleneck [57.519119962528166]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated remarkable progress in reasoning capabilities through reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR)<n>We present a theoretical characterization of LLM reasoning grounded in information bottleneck (IB) principle.<n>We propose IB-aware reasoning optimization (IBRO), a framework that encourages reasoning trajectories to be both informative about the final correct answer and generalizable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-24T13:14:25Z)
• No Free Lunch: Rethinking Internal Feedback for LLM Reasoning [12.881043910316787]
  Reinforcement learning has emerged as a powerful paradigm for post-training large language models (LLMs) to improve reasoning.<n>We investigate an alternative class of methods, Reinforcement Learning from Internal Feedback (RLIF), which relies solely on intrinsic model-derived signals instead of external rewards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-20T17:59:52Z)
• Beyond Accuracy: Dissecting Mathematical Reasoning for LLMs Under Reinforcement Learning [82.43575191712726]
  We introduce a fine-grained analytic framework to dissect the impact ofReinforcement learning on reasoning.<n>Our framework specifically investigates key elements that have been hypothesized to benefit from RL training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T07:53:59Z)
• Beyond Markovian: Reflective Exploration via Bayes-Adaptive RL for LLM Reasoning [55.36978389831446]
  We recast reflective exploration within the Bayes-Adaptive RL framework.<n>Our resulting algorithm, BARL, instructs the LLM to stitch and switch strategies based on observed outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-26T22:51:00Z)
• Mapping the Minds of LLMs: A Graph-Based Analysis of Reasoning LLM [11.181783720439563]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) display sophisticated reasoning abilities via extended Chain-of-Thought (CoT) generation.<n>RLMs often demonstrate counterintuitive and unstable behaviors, such as performance degradation under few-shot prompting.<n>We introduce a unified graph-based analytical framework for better modeling the reasoning processes of RLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T03:54:57Z)
• Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model? [67.30809748319486]
  Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has recently demonstrated notable success in enhancing the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs)<n>This study critically examines the current state of RLVR.<n>We find that the current training setup does not elicit fundamentally new reasoning patterns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T17:59:56Z)
• Exploring the Effect of Reinforcement Learning on Video Understanding: Insights from SEED-Bench-R1 [53.894789613838654]
  We introduce SEED-Bench-R1, a benchmark designed to evaluate post-training methods for MLLMs in video understanding.<n>It includes intricate real-world videos and complex everyday planning tasks in the format of multiple-choice questions.<n>Using Qwen2-VL-Instruct-7B as a base model, we compare RL with supervised fine-tuning (SFT)<n>Our detailed analysis reveals that RL enhances visual perception but often produces less coherent reasoning chains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-31T17:55:23Z)
• Think or Not Think: A Study of Explicit Thinking in Rule-Based Visual Reinforcement Fine-Tuning [7.78764814568908]
  We first propose CLS-RL for MLLM image classification, using verifiable rewards for fine-tuning.<n>We then rethink and question whether explicit thinking in RFT is always necessary.<n>No-Thinking-RL explores RFT without thinking by introducing a simple equality accuracy reward.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T14:37:45Z)
• Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Iterative DPO: A Comprehensive Empirical Investigation [29.579349371114702]
  Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) is a cost-effective alternative to reinforcement learning (RL) for large language models (LLMs)<n>We show that a single round of DPO with coarse filtering significantly enhances mathematical reasoning performance.<n>With simple verifiable rewards, our model achieves RL-level performance with significantly lower computational overhead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T06:28:25Z)
• R1-Searcher: Incentivizing the Search Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning [87.30285670315334]
  textbfR1-Searcher is a novel two-stage outcome-based RL approach designed to enhance the search capabilities of Large Language Models.<n>Our framework relies exclusively on RL, without requiring process rewards or distillation for a cold start.<n>Our experiments demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms previous strong RAG methods, even when compared to the closed-source GPT-4o-mini.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-07T17:14:44Z)
• On the Emergence of Thinking in LLMs I: Searching for the Right Intuition [34.32871896067864]
  We propose a post-training framework called Reinforcement Learning via Self-Play (RLSP)<n> RLSP involves three steps: supervised fine-tuning with human or synthetic demonstrations of the reasoning process, using an exploration reward signal to encourage diverse and efficient reasoning behaviors, and RL training with an outcome verifier to ensure correctness while preventing reward hacking.<n> Empirical studies in the math domain show that RLSP improves reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T18:52:04Z)
• Satori: Reinforcement Learning with Chain-of-Action-Thought Enhances LLM Reasoning via Autoregressive Search [57.28671084993782]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities across diverse domains.<n>Recent studies have shown that increasing test-time computation enhances LLMs' reasoning capabilities.<n>We propose a two-stage training paradigm: 1) a small-scale format tuning stage to internalize the COAT reasoning format and 2) a large-scale self-improvement stage leveraging reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T17:26:58Z)
• VinePPO: Refining Credit Assignment in RL Training of LLMs [66.80143024475635]
  We propose VinePPO, a straightforward approach that leverages the flexibility of language environments to compute unbiased Monte Carlo-based estimates.<n>Our method consistently outperforms PPO and other baselines across MATH and GSM8K datasets in less wall-clock time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T15:49:30Z)
• LaGR-SEQ: Language-Guided Reinforcement Learning with Sample-Efficient Querying [71.86163159193327]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated their impressive ability to provide context-aware responses via text. This ability could potentially be used to predict plausible solutions in sequential decision making tasks pertaining to pattern completion. We introduce LaGR, which uses this predictive ability of LLMs to propose solutions to tasks that have been partially completed by a primary reinforcement learning (RL) agent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-21T02:07:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.