How to Allocate, How to Learn? Dynamic Rollout Allocation and Advantage Modulation for Policy Optimization
Organizations: Meituan · Tsinghua University · Fudan University · Peking University
Abstract
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has proven effective for Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning, yet current methods face key challenges in resource allocation and policy optimization dynamics: (i) uniform rollout allocation ignores gradient variance heterogeneity across problems, and (ii) the softmax policy structure causes gradient attenuation for high-confidence correct actions, while excessive gradient updates may destabilize training. Therefore, we propose DynaMO, a theoretically-grounded dual-pronged optimization framework. At the sequence level, we prove that uniform allocation is suboptimal and derive variance-minimizing allocation from the first principle, establishing Bernoulli variance as a computable proxy for gradient informativeness. At the token level, we develop gradient-aware advantage modulation grounded in theoretical analysis of gradient magnitude bounds. Our framework compensates for gradient attenuation of high-confidence correct actions while utilizing entropy changes as computable indicators to stabilize excessive update magnitudes. Extensive experiments conducted on a diverse range of mathematical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate consistent improvements over strong RLVR baselines. Our implementation is available at: https://github.com/GithubX-F/DynaMO-RL.
Figures & tables
| Method | AIME24 | AIME25 | AMC23 | MATH500 | Minerva | Olympiad | Avg. | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P@1 | P@32 | P@1 | P@32 | P@1 | P@32 | P@1 | P@32 | P@1 | P@32 | P@1 | P@32 | P@1 | P@32 | |
| Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B | ||||||||||||||
| GRPO | 13.2 | 32.3 | 7.6 | 31.5 | 56.0 | 90.0 | 54.4 | 79.2 | 17.2 | 42.8 | 25.6 | 47.0 | 29.0 | 53.8 |
| Clip-Higher | 12.4 | 34.7 | 6.4 | 30.6 | 50.6 | 89.9 | 56.8 | 80.2 | 16.8 | 41.3 | 26.4 | 46.8 | 28.2 | 53.9 |
| Entropy Loss | 12.6 | 33.7 | 5.8 | 28.4 | 55.6 | 86.9 | 56.3 | 78.5 | 17.6 | 43.6 | 25.4 | 46.4 | 28.9 | 52.9 |
| Fork Tokens | 9.4 | 32.0 | 5.9 | 31.4 | 52.5 | 85.6 | 54.3 | 74.2 | 16.6 | 36.8 | 25.5 | 45.2 | 27.4 | 50.9 |
| Method | AIME24 | AIME25 | AMC23 | MATH500 | Minerva | Olympiad | Avg. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DynaMO | 34.4 | 15.4 | 74.4 | 66.4 | 27.3 | 31.6 | 41.6 |
| - GC | 33.8 | 15.0 | 71.9 | 65.0 | 26.7 | 29.3 | 40.3 |
| - UMS | 33.2 | 14.7 | 71.9 | 64.9 | 25.9 | 30.2 | 40.1 |
| - DRA | 31.9 | 15.2 | 73.4 | 65.7 | 23.0 | 30.4 | 39.9 |
| - GC & DRA | 31.9 | 14.5 | 69.0 | 64.4 | 23.7 | 29.7 | 38.9 |
| - GC & UMS | 30.5 | 14.3 | 70.2 | 63.5 | 22.2 | 29.4 | 38.4 |
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Category | Parameter | Value |
| Training Hyperparameters | ||
| Batch Configuration | Generation Batch Size | 512 |
| Update Batch Size | 32 | |
| PPO Mini-batch Size | 32 | |
| Rollout Allocation | Average Rollouts per Prompt | 16 |
| Dynamic Range | [8, 24] | |
| Benchmark | Core Description | Key Characteristics |
|---|---|---|
| AIME | American Invitational Mathematics Examination - high school competition | • 15 challenging problems per round • Integer answers (0-999) • Algebra, Geometry, Number Theory, Combinatorics • Multi-step reasoning required • Top AMC performers participate |
| AMC | American Mathematics Competitions - tiered assessment system | • Three tiers (AMC 8/10/12) for different grades • 25 multiple-choice problems per tier • Curriculum-aligned design • Comprehensive secondary mathematics coverage • Standardized difficulty progression |
| MATH-500 | Curated subset from MATH dataset | • 500 problems from comprehensive collection • Seven domains (Algebra, Geometry, Number Theory, etc.) • Five difficulty levels • Formal mathematical reasoning • Step-by-step solution verification |
| Minerva Math | Technical STEM benchmark | • Undergraduate to graduate difficulty • Physics, Chemistry, Biology applications • Symbolic manipulation and formula derivation • Domain-specific knowledge integration • Quantitative problem-solving |
| OlympiadBench | Bilingual Olympiad-level benchmark | • Large-scale competition problem collection • Bilingual (English and Chinese) • Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology • Theorem-proving and open-ended problems • Multimodal inputs (text, diagrams, equations) |
Reinforcement Learning
Reinforcement learning studies how agents learn sequential decisions from rewards and interaction, balancing exploration, performance, safety, and adaptation.
See all 1,717 papersWhen to Stop Reusing: Dynamic Gradient Gating for Sample-Efficient RLVR
lm\_head weight change, while intermediate layers remain stable. Empirically, we verify that DWD emerges consistently across diverse LLMs and tasks. Theoretically, we prove that (i) harmful gradients concentrate at the lm\_head while intermediate layers are structurally attenuated, and (ii) the lm\_head gradient norm lower-bounds the policy divergence. These results establish the lm\_head gradient norm as a principled, real-time signal of catastrophic policy shift. Guided by this insight, we propose Dynamic Gradient Gating (DGG), a lightweight intervention that monitors the lm\_head gradient norm in real time and intercepts harmful gradients before they corrupt the optimizer. DGG consistently matches or exceeds the standard single-use baseline, achieving up to sample efficiency and wall-clock speedup across math, ALFWorld, WebShop, and search-augmented QA tasks.