Reinforcement learning (RL) for large language models (LLMs) has shown strong performance in single-turn tasks, but extending it to multi-turn interaction remains challenging due to sparse rewards and poor per-turn credit assignment. In emotional support dialogues, responses shape future user states, so matched-state step-wise comparison is unavailable, while trajectory-level supervision is insufficient. We propose MICA (Multi-granularity Intertemporal Credit Assignment), a critic-free RL framework for multi-turn emotional support tasks. MICA derives both immediate and delayed credit from a shared potential function over the user's structured support state. Incremental Distance Reward measures the per-turn decrease in residual distance to the target state, while its Monte Carlo return captures delayed effects. After scope-specific normalization, the two signals form a mixed advantage for stable per-turn optimization without matched-state comparisons, rollout trees, or a learned critic. On EMPA, EQ-Bench, and EmoBench with Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct and Qwen3-8B/14B/32B, MICA consistently outperforms GRPO and REINFORCE++, achieving up to +42.5 on EMPA, while adding no rollout cost and remaining robust to reward judges. These results show that turn-aware credit assignment enables effective and practical multi-turn RL for interactive LLMs.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Framework of MICA. The policy model interacts with Actor to collect multi-turn trajectories, and then is optimized via Mixed-Advantage .
Figure 2: MICA Overall Framework. Given an initial prompt, we sample K trajectories from the current policy, each consisting of T turns. The Turn-level advantage is computed by normalizing returns across samples at the same turn. The Group-level advantage is computed by normalizing rewards over all K×T samples in the group. The final advantage is a convex combination of these two terms, balancing fine-grained credit assignment with global group-level optimization.
Figure 3: Distribution of Monte Carlo returns and immediate rewards across dialogue turns at specific training step. (a) Monte Carlo returns exhibit a clear positive correlation with the turn index; (b) In contrast, immediate rewards show no discernible trend across turns.
Model
Method
EMPA
EmoBench (Acc. %)
EQ-Bench
Pass
Score
EA
EU
Overall
Score
Gemini-2.5-pro
27.0
90.7
74.0
62.0
68.0
86.4
Claude-3.5-sonnet
25.0
85.1
73.0
54.0
63.5
77.0
DeepSeek-V3.2
25.0
78.4
73.0
55.0
64.0
84.9
Qwen3-32B
Base
19.0
68.9
70.0
43.0
56.5
74.0
GRPO
21.0 ±0.8
73.6 ±0.5
69.7 ±0.5
44.3 ±0.5
57.0 ±0.4
74.6 ±0.2
Table 1: Quantitative results on empathy benchmarks. We compare different base models across five settings: Base (original), GRPO, REINFORCE++ variants (with Traj and IDR-Batch), and MICA. Results are averaged over 3 random seeds. For non-Base models, each result is reported with its standard deviation as a subscript.
Figure 4: Empathy alignment scores across various dimensions. MICA consistently outperforms GRPO and REINFORCE++ variants across all dimensions and model scales, showing greater alignment gains over Base Model.
Trained Model
Judger
EMPA
EmoBench (Acc. %)
EQ-Bench
Pass
Score
EA
EU
Overall
Score
Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct
Qwen3-235B
8.7 ±0.5
58.2 ±0.7
69.7 ±0.4
38.7 ±0.4
54.2 ±0.4
55.8 ±0.8
MiniMax-M2.5
8.3 ±0.5
56.8 ±0.8
68.7 ±0.5
39.0 ±0.0
53.8 ±0.2
55.7 ±0.3
GLM-4.7
9.3 ±0.5
59.5 ±0.6
69.3 ±0.5
38.7 ±0.5
54.0 ±0.0
56.8 ±0.4
Qwen3-8B
Qwen3-235B
8.3 ±0.5
41.5 ±1.8
68.3 ±0.5
37.7 ±0.5
53.0 ±0.4
74.5 ±0.4
MiniMax-M2.5
8.7 ±0.5
43.5 ±0.2
69.0 ±0.0
38.7 ±0.5
53.8 ±0.2
74.6 ±0.3
Table 2: Quantitative results under different Judgers. Results are averaged over 3 random seeds. MICA yields similar downstream performance when trained with Qwen3-235B, MiniMax-M2.5, or GLM-4.7 as the Judger, suggesting limited sensitivity to the specific Judger choice in this setting.
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: Reward and gradient norm curves of Qwen3-8B and Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct under various advantages. Mixed Advantage achieves the highest converged reward while maintaining stable gradient norms, demonstrating simultaneous improvements in both reward performance and training stability.
Trained Model
Advantage Level
EMPA
EmoBench (Acc. %)
EQ-Bench
Pass
Score
EA
EU
Overall
Score
Qwen3-8B
Group-Level
5.7 ±0.5
38.5 ±0.4
67.7 ±0.5
35.3 ±0.5
51.5 ±0.4
73.3 ±0.4
Turn-Level
5.7 ±0.5
36.1 ±0.5
68.0 ±0
35.3 ±0.5
51.7 ±0.2
72.8 ±0.4
Mixed
8.3±0.5
41.5±1.8
68.3±0.5
37.7±0.5
53.0±0.4
74.5±0.3
Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct
Group-Level
6.0 ±0.0
50.8 ±0.5
69.0 ±0.0
34.7 ±0.5
51.8 ±0.2
55.8±0.7
Turn-Level
6.7 ±0.5
54.5 ±1
68.7 ±0.5
33.7 ±0.5
51.2 ±0.2
54.8 ±0.3
Appendix
Table 3: Quantitative results under different Advantage Level. Mixed Advantage consistently achieves the best overall downstream performance compared with Group-Level and Turn-Level Advantage. Results are averaged over 3 random seeds, and each result is reported with its standard deviation as a subscript.
Figure 6: Effect of the Turn-level advantage weight α on dialogue strategy and benchmark performance. We sweep α∈{0.0,0.1,…,1.0} in the mixed advantage A=αAt+(1−α)Ag on Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct and run 5 independent trials per configuration. Error bars denote one standard deviation across the 5 trials; small dots denote per-trial values. Increasing α correlates with longer, more stable EMPA dialogues, while EmoBench and EQ-Bench (single-turn benchmarks) are largely insensitive to α .
Figure 7: Training reward curves under three Judgers for four base models. Each panel reports the per-step reward returned by the Judger during MICA training; transparent lines show raw rewards and bold lines show a centered moving average with window 5 . The dotted horizontal line marks reward 0 . Reward magnitudes are not directly comparable across Judgers due to per-Judger scoring calibration.
Figure 8: Cosine similarity of Judger score directions on fixed EMPA traces. Gemini-2.5-pro generates dialogue trajectories for the 30 EMPA test cases, and the same response turns are rescored by Qwen3-235B, MiniMax-M2.5, and GLM-4.7. Each entry reports the averaged cosine similarity between per-response score-change vectors (Δxt,Δyt,Δzt) .
Advantage Level
Reward Design
EMPA
EmoBench (Acc. %)
EQ-Bench
Pass
Score
EA
EU
Overall
Score
Group-level
ADR
1.0 ±0.0
18.2 ±0.4
65.7 ±0.5
30.3 ±0.5
48.0 ±0.0
69.7 ±0.2
IDR
5.7 ±0.5
38.5 ±0.4
67.7 ±0.5
35.3 ±0.5
51.5 ±0.4
73.3 ±0.4
Turn-level
ADR
3.3 ±0.5
31.5 ±0.7
68.0 ±0.0
32.3 ±0.5
50.2 ±0.2
72.1 ±0.1
IDR
5.3 ±0.5
34.0 ±0.4
67.7 ±0.5
33.3 ±0.5
50.5 ±0.4
72.3 ±0.4
Mixed
IDR
8.3±0.5
41.5±1.8
68.3±0.5
37.7±0.5
53.0±0.4
74.5±0.3
Appendix
Table 4: Quantitative results under different Reward Design on Qwen3-8B. Results are averaged over 3 random seeds, and each result is reported with its standard deviation as a subscript.
Large language models have demonstrated conversational capabilities, yet empathetic competence remains challenging. Empathetic support is inherently multi-turn and path-dependent: users disclose concerns gradually, emotions evolve over time, and early responses shape trust and receptivity. Reinforcement learning with verifiable emotion rewards provides scalable supervision for long-horizon interactions. However, existing methods evolve the dialogue policy while keeping its training interaction distribution fixed, creating a mismatch between policy competence and training experience. We introduce a dual-loop self-evolution framework driven by verifiable emotion feedback. With the user simulator and verifier frozen, the inner loop optimizes the multi-turn policy using continuous emotion rewards, while the outer loop uses the same outcomes to estimate policy-relative interaction utility and adapt experience. To obtain estimates from sparse, stochastic rollouts, the framework holds the scenario and interaction state constant within each group and prioritizes conditions whose group pass rates lie near the policy's competence boundary. A hierarchical controller shares evidence across support intents, while uncertainty-guided exploration and uniform rehearsal prevent premature exclusion. The resulting distribution generates trajectories, closing both loops without increasing the rollout budget. On SAGE, our framework raises Qwen3-8B Overall from 53.87 to 79.24 and outperforms protocol-matched uniform emotion-reward reinforcement learning by 7.23 points.
Yi Wei, Shuo Jiang, Huaixia Dou +5
Qwen DianJin Team, Alibaba Cloud Computing · Beihang University · School of Computer Science and Technology, Soochow University
Social intelligence enables agents to read social context, infer intent, and adapt over sustained dialogue. As language models become autonomous collaborators, it is central to building effective and trustworthy human-AI interaction. Existing reinforcement learning methods optimize single-turn utterances and sparse outcome rewards, producing short-sighted policies that struggle to manage goal-relationship tensions across multi-turn interactions. We propose SocialRL, a multi-turn reinforcement learning framework addressing both challenges. First, we apply multi-turn reinforcement learning using PPO that propagates delayed outcome rewards back to each turn, enabling long-horizon planning. Second, we design six process reward dimensions capturing the goal-relationship trade-off, including goal advancement, relational attunement, contextual coherence, etc. A reward model dynamically generates fine-grained scoring criteria for each dimension, while a stage-aware weight schedule prioritizes relationship-building in early turns, goal advancement mid-way, and balanced closure late. Across multiple social-dialogue benchmarks, SocialRL improves Goal Achievement by an average of 9.2 percentage points over the corresponding Base models. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of SocialRL across synthetic and real social scenes, as well as standard and challenging social scenarios.
Training LLMs as interactive agents for multi-turn decision-making remains challenging, particularly in long-horizon tasks with sparse and delayed rewards, where agents must execute extended sequences of actions before receiving meaningful feedback. Most existing reinforcement learning (RL) approaches model LLM agents as flat policies operating at a single time scale, selecting one action at each turn. In sparse-reward settings, such flat policies must propagate credit across the entire trajectory without explicit temporal abstraction, which often leads to unstable optimization and inefficient credit assignment. We propose HiPER, a novel Hierarchical Plan-Execute RL framework that explicitly separates high-level planning from low-level execution. HiPER factorizes the policy into a high-level planner that proposes subgoals and a low-level executor that carries them out over multiple action steps. To align optimization with this structure, we introduce a key technique called hierarchical advantage estimation (HAE), which carefully assigns credit at both the planning and execution levels. By aggregating returns over the execution of each subgoal and coordinating updates across the two levels, HAE provides an unbiased gradient estimator and provably reduces variance compared to flat generalized advantage estimation. Empirically, HiPER achieves state-of-the-art performance on challenging interactive benchmarks, reaching 97.4% success on ALFWorld and 83.3% on WebShop with Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct (+6.6% and +8.3% over the best prior method), with especially large gains on long-horizon tasks requiring multiple dependent subtasks. These results highlight the importance of explicit hierarchical decomposition for scalable RL training of multi-turn LLM agents.
Jiangweizhi Peng, Yuanxin Liu, Ruida Zhou +4
University of Minnesota · Northwestern University · Amazon AGI +2