Authors: Roger Girgis, Rodrigue de Schaetzen, Luke Rowe, Azalée Robitaille, Christopher Pal, Liam Paull
Abstract
Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) remains the dominant critic-free approach for fine-tuning LLMs and VLMs, but its compatibility with constrained policy optimization (e.g. for safety-critical domains) has not been carefully examined. In this work, we introduce Constrained GRPO, a Lagrangian-based extension of GRPO for constrained policy optimization. We show that the standard practice of scalarizing rewards before normalization introduces a critical Lagrangian-specific failure mode: GRPO's within-group normalization makes constrained optimization highly sensitive to how multi-component learning signals are aggregated. We show that scalarizing rewards before normalization introduces shared-denominator coupling, so that changing one multiplier alters not only the emphasis on its corresponding constraint, but also the relative weighting of the reward and other constraints. We address this with a simple but crucial modification: scalarizing standardized advantages rather than rewards. This yields a better-conditioned update by addressing the coupling induced by reward scalarization, resulting in better-behaved multiplier dynamics and more stable constraint enforcement in practice. Empirically, across a controlled gridworld, a real-world autonomous driving benchmark, and a mathematical reasoning task, Constrained GRPO consistently achieves better adherence to specified constraints while maintaining or improving task performance.
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards is ideal for multi-constraint instruction following, yet standard group-relative policy optimization (GRPO) becomes unstable under discrete, low-dispersion rewards, where within-group reward distributions are frequently homogeneous. We identify and formalize three pathologies of z-score group normalization in this regime: low-variance amplification, mean-centering blindness, and zero-variance collapse. To address them, we propose MDP-GRPO, which stabilizes learning through (1) multi-temperature sampling to increase reward dispersion, (2) dual-anchor advantages to restore gradients in homogeneous groups and stop mean-centering blindness, (3) prospect-theoretic shaping to bound updates and penalize violations based on Kahneman and Tversky's theory, and (4) asymmetric KL regularization. Evaluated on FollowBench, IFEval, and a curated multi-constraint dataset, MDP-GRPO outperforms standard GRPO, improving strict constraint satisfaction by up to 5.0% on Llama-3.2-3B. Our method also enables stable convergence with small group sizes while preserving general capabilities on MMLU and ARC.
Mohammad Mahdi Salmani-Zarchi, Zahra Rahimi, Heshaam Faili +1
Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) has been a key driver of recent progress in reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) for large language models, but it is typically trained in a low-staleness, near-on-policy regime that incurs substantial system overhead. We ask a simple question: How off-policy can GRPO be? We show that GRPO-style algorithms can tolerate substantially larger rollout staleness than previously assumed, and propose Mu-GRPO, an RL training framework that organizes training into a small number (e.g., four) of large sequential generation-optimization stages. This design induces high rollout staleness while greatly reducing rollout-optimization switching overhead. To stabilize learning under stale data, Mu-GRPO combines relaxed clipping, which preserves useful stale-rollout gradients, with negative-advantage veto, which removes destabilizing post-trigger suffix updates in negative-advantage responses. Across five language models and multiple math reasoning benchmarks, Mu-GRPO matches or exceeds the performance of standard GRPO while achieving around 2x speedup in wall-clock training time, establishing a substantially improved performance-efficiency trade-off for LLM reinforcement learning.
Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) is one of the most widely adopted RLVR algorithms for post-training large language models on reasoning tasks. We first show that GRPO admits an equivalent discriminative reformulation, in which policy optimization maximizes the expected score gap between verified positive and negative rollouts. This reformulation reveals two objective-level limitations: likelihood-misaligned surrogate scores, in which clipped ratio-based scores are optimized rather than the sequence likelihoods that govern generation, and score-insensitive credit assignment, in which rollout-level credit does not reflect the current score gaps between positive and negative rollouts. To address these limitations, we propose ConSPO, a Contrastive Sequence-level Policy Optimization method that uses length-normalized sequence log-probabilities as rollout scores and contrasts verified positive rollouts against negative distractors within the same group. ConSPO optimizes a group-wise InfoNCE-style objective to adaptively strengthen updates for poorly separated positives and high-scoring negatives, together with a curriculum-scheduled margin that preserves separation pressure as training progresses. Experiments across diverse settings show that ConSPO outperforms strong baselines on challenging reasoning benchmarks. Code will be released upon paper acceptance.