Survive or Collapse: The Asymmetric Roles of Data Gating and Reward Grounding in Self-Play RL

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.22217v1
• Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 09:19:23 GMT
• Title: Survive or Collapse: The Asymmetric Roles of Data Gating and Reward Grounding in Self-Play RL
• Abstract summary: Self-play reinforcement learning trains language models on their own generated tasks, co-evolving a proposer and solver without human labels.<n>Recent systems report strong reasoning gains, but collapse and instability are widely observed and poorly understood.<n>We argue instead that self-play stability is governed by two distinct levers: a data-level gate that decides which proposer-generated tasks enter the training pool, and the reward signal that updates the policy on tasks already admitted.
• Score: 76.45061154544568
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Self-play reinforcement learning trains language models on their own generated tasks, co-evolving a proposer and solver without human labels. Recent systems report strong reasoning gains, but collapse and instability are widely observed and poorly understood. The dominant response treats this as a reward-design problem. We argue instead that self-play stability is governed by two distinct levers: a data-level gate that decides which proposer-generated tasks enter the training pool, and the reward signal that updates the policy on tasks already admitted. Through controlled experiments on a Python output-prediction task and a deterministic-DSL twin task that strips pretraining priors, output ambiguity, and executor noise, we find the two levers are asymmetric. A strict gate is sufficient for stability under every reward variant we test, including a self-consistency reward with no access to ground truth; while no reward variant is sufficient once the gate is removed. This asymmetry exposes a counter-intuitive coupling we call the Grounded Proposer Paradox: a proposer with ground-truth access accelerates collapse faster than an ungrounded one when paired with a self-consistency solver, by concentrating training on clean tasks that form the fastest path to a spurious self-consistent attractor. Replacing the binary gate with a continuous strictness parameter $\varepsilon$ further reveals a two-stage phase transition: training-side metrics decouple at low $\varepsilon$, while validation accuracy holds until $\varepsilon$ is much higher. Data-level gating, not reward calibration, is the binding constraint on self-play stability.

Related papers

• The Intervention Gap in Latent World Models [0.0]
  Planning-time intervention fidelity is a distinct, measurable property of a learned world model.<n>Across released TD-MPC2 checkpoint sizes, episode return falls as an operator-error diagnostic on task observables grows.<n>A self-supervised world model trained without task signal preserves the same operator substantially better than a task-anchored model on the shared task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-30T19:47:51Z)
• H$^2$SD: Hybrid Hindsight Self-Distillation [61.71131241473028]
  Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) provides reliable outcome supervision for language model reasoning.<n>Existing self-distillation methods add a privileged teacher but typically assign it a fixed role.<n>We introduce Hybrid Hindsight Self-Distillation ($mathrmH2mathrmSD$), which jointly adapts teacher context and update strategy to trajectory correctness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-21T10:47:27Z)
• Reward-Free Evolving Agents via Pairwise Validator [12.6053820984668]
  A self-evolving agentic loop repeatedly proposes a tweaked version of an agent.<n>It accepts or rejects the change based on a per-iteration quality signal.<n>We propose replacing the scalar at the accept/reject gate with a pairwise validator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-15T22:50:32Z)
• From Patches to Trajectories: Privileged Process Supervision for Software-Engineering Agents [56.31499185764872]
  Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on long teacher trajectories is the dominant way to instill investigation and reasoning in open software-engineering (SWE) agents.<n>We propose Patches-to-Trajectories (P2T), which uses $pstar$ as privileged information during curation and formulates trajectory construction as bi-objective optimization over per-step effectiveness and trajectory length.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T04:54:55Z)
• CoVerRL: Breaking the Consensus Trap in Label-Free Reasoning via Generator-Verifier Co-Evolution [52.691495954442985]
  CoVerRL is a framework where a single model alternates between generator and verifier roles, with each capability bootstrapping the other.<n> Experiments across Qwen and Llama model families demonstrate that CoVerRL outperforms label-free baselines by 4.7-5.9% on mathematical reasoning benchmarks.<n>Self-verification accuracy improves from around 55% to over 85%, confirming that both capabilities genuinely co-evolve.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-18T14:38:55Z)
• Honesty over Accuracy: Trustworthy Language Models through Reinforced Hesitation [12.503662455234954]
  We show that modern language models produce confident hallucinations even when wrong answers carry catastrophic consequences.<n>We propose Reinforced Hesitation (RH): a modification to Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) to use ternary rewards instead of binary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-14T17:20:45Z)
• Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable yet Noisy Rewards under Imperfect Verifiers [90.50039419576807]
  Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) trains policies against automated verifiers to avoid costly human labeling.<n>To reduce vulnerability to verifier hacking, many RLVR systems collapse rewards to binary $0,1$ during training.<n>This choice carries a cost: it introduces textitfalse negatives (rejecting correct answers, FNs) and textitfalse positives (accepting incorrect ones, FPs)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T13:56:44Z)
• Abduct, Act, Predict: Scaffolding Causal Inference for Automated Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems [20.846301581161978]
  Failure attribution in multi-agent systems is a critical yet unsolved challenge.<n>Current methods treat this as a pattern recognition task over long conversation logs.<n>A2P Scaffolding transforms failure attribution from pattern recognition into a structured causal inference task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-12T16:51:15Z)
• Co-rewarding: Stable Self-supervised RL for Eliciting Reasoning in Large Language Models [56.055015597319674]
  Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is effective to improve the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs)<n>Recent self-rewarding methods investigate a label-free alternative to unlock the reasoning capabilities of LLMs.<n>We propose textitCo-rewarding, a novel self-supervised RL framework that improves training stability by seeking complementary supervision from another views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T08:09:14Z)
• Core Safety Values for Provably Corrigible Agents [2.6451153531057985]
  We introduce the first implementable framework for corrigibility, with provable guarantees in multi-step, partially observed environments.<n>Our framework replaces a single reward with five *structurally separate* utility heads.<n>For open-ended settings where adversaries can modify the agent, we prove that deciding whether an arbitrary post-hack agent will ever violate corrigibility is undecidable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-28T16:19:25Z)
• WR-ONE2SET: Towards Well-Calibrated Keyphrase Generation [57.11538133231843]
  Keyphrase generation aims to automatically generate short phrases summarizing an input document. The recently emerged ONE2SET paradigm generates keyphrases as a set and has achieved competitive performance. We propose WR-ONE2SET which extends ONE2SET with an adaptive instance-level cost Weighting strategy and a target Re-assignment mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-13T09:56:24Z)

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.