TIC-GRPO: Provable and Efficient Optimization for Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback
Authors: Lei Pang, Jun Luo, Ruinan Jin
Organizations: Peking University Beijing, China · The Ohio State University Columbus, USA · Shugu Yuntai Technology Co., Ltd. · Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence Abu Dhabi, UAE
Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) trains language models without a value critic using rewards centered within sampled response groups. We study how importance weighting, clipping, and length normalization affect its stochastic updates and propose Trajectory-level Importance-Corrected GRPO (TIC-GRPO), combining an upper importance-ratio cap with a full-trajectory likelihood ratio. Under common maximum-length normalization, a trajectory change of measure gives a score second moment proportional to the response horizon. We propagate this estimate through the actual empirical baseline and all inner updates. With separately optimized constant steps, the sampling term in TIC's stationarity bound has a linear horizon coefficient, versus order three halves for token-level GRPO2. Matching upper and lower bounds separate the capped methods' worst-case response-level variances by a factor T. The bounds track prompt count, response-group size, vocabulary size, reward scale, and score regularity; per-response-normalized GRPO also retains a length-covariance term. Experiments at two Qwen3 scales on four reasoning and coding benchmarks evaluate both mechanisms in sampled-token-normalized training.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Squared Euclidean distances between consecutive parameter iterates, ∥θk+1−θk∥22 . TIC-GRPO has the lowest and most stable values in these runs.
Method
AIME24
AIME25
MATH500
Live-CodeBench
(Avg@32)
(Avg@32)
(Avg@1)
(Avg@1)
Qwen3-1.7B
GRPO
9.17
5.31
66.6
10.67
GSPO
10.31 (+1.14)
6.24 (+0.93)
69.0 (+2.4)
11.23 (+0.56)
TIC-GRPO
11.77 (+2.60)
6.98 (+1.67)
69.8 (+3.2)
12.11 (+1.44)
Qwen3-8B
Table 1: Main results. Avg@1 uses greedy decoding and Avg@32 uses 32 samples; parentheses are gains over GRPO.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 2: Training dynamics of different GRPO variants on Qwen3-1.7B and Qwen3-8B models. Left panels show the AIME24 Avg@32 accuracy curves, while right panels report the corresponding training reward curves. Each panel compares the three methods at the recorded training steps.
Method
AIME24
AIME25
MATH500
Live-CodeBench
(Avg@32)
(Avg@32)
(Avg@1)
(Avg@1)
Qwen3-1.7B
GRPO
9.17
5.31
66.6
10.67
GRPO+UB_Clip
10.31 (+1.14)
6.64 (+1.33)
67.4 (+0.8)
11.34 (+0.67)
GRPO+Traj_IS
10.62 (+1.45)
6.77 (+1.46)
68.0 (+1.4)
11.44 (+0.77)
TIC-GRPO
11.77 (+2.60)
6.98 (+1.67)
69.8 (+3.2)
12.11 (+1.44)
Appendix
Table 2: Ablation study of TIC-GRPO on Qwen3-1.7B. We compare the GRPO baseline with two component variants—up-only clipping (GRPO+UB_Clip) and trajectory-level importance sampling (GRPO+Traj_IS)—as well as their combination (TIC-GRPO).
Figure 3: Ablation analysis of TIC-GRPO on Qwen3-1.7B.
Optimizer steps
GRPO
GRPO 2
GSPO
TIC-GRPO
Qwen3-0.6B
1–25
26.33
31.63
26.93
23.54
26–50
45.29
52.39
45.02
29.09
51–75
48.37
40.25
41.40
28.02
76–100
32.09
31.88
31.81
26.54
101–125
30.70
30.42
28.91
25.50
Appendix
Table 3: Squared Euclidean distances between consecutive parameter iterates, in units of 106 . Interval rows report temporal means; each overall row reports the mean ± temporal standard deviation across optimizer steps 1–200.
Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) is the dominant reinforcement learning algorithm for training reasoning capabilities in large language models, notably adopted by DeepSeek-R1. The recent improvement Dr. GRPO (COLM 2025) identifies the response-level length bias caused by per-trajectory length normalization in GRPO and proposes removing this normalization, claiming the resulting optimizer is "unbiased." We show that this claim is incomplete. Specifically, we establish an impossibility theorem: under the standard outcome reward + GRPO setting, no length-based weighting scheme can simultaneously achieve the following two properties. (P1) Gradient unbiasedness: the gradient estimator is an unbiased estimate of the true policy gradient. (P2) Length invariance: each trajectory's effective contribution to the gradient is independent of its token length. GRPO approximately satisfies P2 but violates P1; Dr. GRPO satisfies P1 but violates P2. We characterize the complete tradeoff spectrum via the parametric family f_alpha(L) = L^{alpha - 1}, where alpha = 0 recovers GRPO, alpha = 1 recovers Dr. GRPO, and provide quantitative analysis showing that Dr. GRPO's length bias can cause longer trajectories to dominate gradient updates by a factor proportional to the length ratio. Our results reveal that neither algorithm is universally "done right"; they occupy opposite ends of a fundamental and unavoidable tradeoff.
Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a key driver of language model reasoning. Among RL algorithms, Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) is the de facto standard, avoiding the need for a critic by using per-prompt baselines and variance normalization. Yet why and when this normalization helps remains unclear. In this work, we answer both questions through the lens of local curvature of the sequence-level policy gradient: standard deviation normalization implements an adaptive gradient. Theoretically, we prove that under mild conditions GRPO attains an improved convergence rate over unnormalized REINFORCE, with gains characterized by the average within-prompt reward standard deviation across prompts and iterations. We further introduce IS-GRPO, an importance-sampling variant of GRPO whose expected update remains aligned with the full gradient, and prove a convergence guarantee of the same form as REINFORCE's, which is tighter in practice during real training runs by a factor we measure. Empirically, on GSM8K and MATH we validate the curvature--variance link and measure the quantities that govern our bounds along real training runs. At 1.5B scale, per-prompt normalization outperforms both unnormalized and globally normalized baselines, with gains that emerge in a middle phase of training where per-prompt variances become heterogeneous. At 7B scale, the normalization schemes become statistically indistinguishable while IS-GRPO retains a small lead, in line with the theory's prediction that the gains require heterogeneity.
Cheng Ge, Caitlyn Heqi Yin, Hao Liang +1
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, MIT · Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin–Madison · Department of Informatics, King’s College London +1
Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) has become a standard reinforcement learning method for post-training language models. Recent work shows that GRPO can reduce the base model's reasoning capacity and underperform it in Pass@k when k is large, indicating reduced coverage of reasoning paths. We find that this reduction is associated with GRPO concentrating on responses that the base model already generates with high probability. We trace this concentration to two mechanisms in the GRPO update. At the response level, high-probability responses dominate the group gradient through repeated occurrence. At the token level, GRPO's importance ratio scales gradients, further reinforcing tokens that become more likely under the current policy. We propose ReCo, a reweighting method that addresses both effects. Response contributions are normalized by their expected occurrence within the rollout group, and the token-level importance ratio is replaced with a variance-based ratio that gives larger update scale to non-saturated decision points where alternative token choices remain plausible. Across Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B/7B and Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct on five mathematical reasoning benchmarks, ReCo improves Pass@k for large values of k and is comparable to GRPO for small values of k.
Junoh Park, Junseo Hwang, Wonguk Cho +1
Graduate School of Data Science, Seoul National University