Multimodal Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning requires large vision-language models to construct reasoning trajectories that interleave perceptual grounding with multi-step inference. However, existing Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) methods typically optimize reasoning at a coarse granularity, treating CoT uniformly without distinguishing their varying degrees of visual grounding. In this work, we conduct a token-level analysis of multimodal reasoning trajectories and show that successful reasoning is characterized by structured token dynamics reflecting both perceptual grounding and exploratory inference. Building upon this analysis, we propose Perception-Exploration Policy Optimization (PEPO), which derives a perception prior from hidden state similarity and integrates it with token entropy through a smooth gating mechanism to produce token-level advantages. PEPO integrates seamlessly with existing RLVR frameworks such as GRPO and DAPO, requiring neither additional supervision nor auxiliary branches. Extensive experiments across diverse multimodal benchmarks demonstrate consistent and robust improvements over strong RL baselines, spanning geometry reasoning, visual grounding, visual puzzle solving, and few-shot classification, while maintaining stable training dynamics. Code: https://github.com/xzxxntxdy/PEPO
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of PEPO. (a) Effective multimodal reasoning arises from the complementarity between perception and exploration. Abbr. Exp.: Exploration-only, Per.: Perception-only, P+E: Perception + Exploration. (b) Unlike traditional sequence-level optimization with uniform advantages, PEPO reweights tokens using a perception prior from visual similarity and entropy via a smooth gate, producing fine-grained token-level advantages. (c) When integrated with GRPO or DAPO, PEPO consistently improves performance across diverse benchmarks.
Figure 2: Distributions of different visual similarity metrics comparing correct and incorrect responses. (a) The global similarity ( Mglob ) across all tokens, where correct responses exhibit a clear rightward shift. (b) The top- K similarity ( Mhigh ), where the correct-response peak also moves right. (c) The bottom- K similarity ( Mlow ), where the shift is negligible. Together, these results show that reasoning correctness is characterized by a subset of visual-grounded tokens.
Figure 3: Token-level analysis of visual similarity and entropy. (a) High visual similarity tokens exhibit larger hidden-state shifts under image removal than high entropy tokens. (b) Word cloud of high entropy tokens and (c) word cloud of high visual similarity tokens, illustrating reasoning-related and perceptual terms.
Figure 4: Framework of PEPO. During response generation, the layer-wise hidden states of response tokens and vision tokens are extracted, along with the output logits. For each response token, visual similarity and entropy are computed, and the centered sum of their normalized values is passed through a smooth gating function to produce token-wise weights that modulate the advantages for PEPO updates.
Method
Geometry3K val
Geometry3K test
MathVista mini
MathVerse mini
LogicVista
Avg
Qwen2.5-VL-3B-Instruct
Base (zero-shot)
11.58
14.25
50.19
37.66
32.22
29.18
High-Entropy RL
15.58
18.26
50.69
39.84
32.59
31.39
GRPO
19.00
23.79
51.56
40.54
28.30
32.64
PEPO G (Ours)
21.91
27.27
54.45
45.42
34.45
36.70 (+4.06)
DAPO
22.63
27.00
53.68
44.44
33.13
36.18
Table 1: Results on Geometry3K validation/test splits and out-of-domain benchmarks, including MathVista, MathVerse, and LogicVista.
Table 6
Method
Qwen2.5-VL-3B-Instruct
InternVL3-2B-Instruct
PuzzleVQA
AlgoPuzzleVQA
Avg
PuzzleVQA
AlgoPuzzleVQA
Avg
Base (zero-shot)
31.80
21.72
26.76
31.80
23.00
27.40
High-Entropy RL
35.00
24.61
29.81
32.60
25.22
28.91
GRPO
43.20
25.44
34.32
43.20
26.17
34.69
PEPO G (Ours)
45.00
26.94
35.97 (+1.65)
45.20
27.22
36.21 (+1.52)
DAPO
44.60
25.33
34.97
44.80
27.72
36.26
Table 4: Accuracy (%) on PuzzleVQA and out-of-domain AlgoPuzzleVQA datasets.
Method
Geometry3K test
MathVista
We-Math
MathVerse
LogicVista
Counting
MMMU-Pro
Avg
GRPO
28.72
59.34
58.90
55.25
38.14
55.81
25.66
45.97
PAPO G
30.95
61.38
60.09
57.14
38.67
62.56
27.11
48.27
PEPO G (Ours)
29.85
63.48
60.98
56.49
39.85
70.75
27.47
49.84 (+3.87)
Table 5: Comparison of scaling performance among GRPO, PAPO, and PEPO on Qwen2.5-VL-3B-Instruct trained with ViRL39K, evaluated across multiple reasoning benchmarks using the avg@8 metric. GRPO and PAPO results are taken directly from [ 67 ] .
Metric
Method
Geometry3K
PuzzleVQA
RefCOCO
FGVC Aircraft
Iter/s
GRPO
0.022
0.066
0.080
0.071
PEPO G
0.022
0.074
0.084
0.083
Mean length
GRPO
273
104
77
92
PEPO G
270
85
64
77
ρ
PEPO G
0.0039
0.0065
0.0061
0.0048
Table 6: Training efficiency comparison between GRPO and PEPO G . We report throughput (iterations per second), mean response length, and the step-level computational overhead ratio ρ across datasets. The overhead ratio ρ measures the proportion of additional weight computation time within a full RL update step.
Table 10Table 11
Figure 5: Qualitative comparison on Geometry3K, MathVerse, and LISA datasets. The GRPO-trained model exhibits perception failures and inconsistent reasoning, leading to incorrect answers. In contrast, the PEPO-trained model generates coherent, visually grounded reasoning chains that produce correct results, demonstrating the effectiveness of PEPO in enhancing multimodal reasoning.
Figure 6: Training curves on FGVC Aircraft (4-shot). We compare GRPO and PEPO G in terms of training reward, mean response length, mean visual similarity, and mean entropy.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Hyperparameter
Task(s)
Value
Shared RL configuration
Optimizer
1–5
AdamW
Train type
1–5
full
Precision
1–5
bfloat16
Gradient checkpointing
1–5
Enabled
Responses per question
1–5
8
Appendix
Table 1: Key hyperparameters across the five tasks.
Task(s)
Design
Reward Design
1, 3, 4
Format reward + Accuracy reward
2
Format reward + IoU reward
5
0.1 × Format reward + 0.9 × Accuracy reward
Prompt Design
1
First output the thinking process in <think> … </think> tags and then output the final answer in <answer> … </answer> tags.
Appendix
Table 2: Prompt and reward design across the five tasks.
α
Geometry3K val
Geometry3K test
MathVista mini
MathVerse mini
LogicVista
Avg
0.00 (Perception-only)
21.07
26.73
52.81
45.31
34.93
36.17
0.02
20.60
25.87
53.88
44.99
34.73
36.01
0.05 (Default)
21.91
27.27
54.45
45.42
34.45
36.70
0.10
22.80
26.81
53.58
44.12
34.26
36.31
0.15
21.45
26.52
53.54
43.99
34.62
36.02
Appendix
Table 3: Ablation on gate strength α of PEPO on geometry and logic reasoning benchmarks using the Qwen2.5-VL-3B-Instruct model.
Measure
Geometry3K val
Geometry3K test
FGVC Aircraft (4-shot)
L1 distance
19.00
24.50
60.85
L2 distance
20.90
26.08
67.33
Cosine similarity (Default)
22.80
26.81
75.79
Appendix
Table 4: Ablation on perception prior measures used to compute visual similarity.
While Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has advanced reasoning in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs), prevailing frameworks suffer from a foundational methodological flaw: by distributing identical advantages across all generated tokens, these methods inherently dilute the learning signals essential for optimizing the critical, visually-grounded steps of multimodal reasoning. To bridge this gap, we formulate Token Visual Dependency, quantifying the causal information gain of visual inputs via the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence between visual-conditioned and text-only predictive distributions. Revealing that this dependency is highly sparse and semantically pivotal, we introduce Perception-Grounded Policy Optimization (PGPO), which is a novel fine-grained credit assignment framework that dynamically reshapes advantages at the token level. Through a threshold-gated, mass-conserving mechanism, PGPO actively amplifies learning signals for visually-dependent tokens while suppressing gradient noise from linguistic priors. Extensive experiments based on the Qwen2.5-VL series across seven challenging multimodal reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that PGPO boosts models by 18.7% on average. Both theoretical and empirical analyses confirm that PGPO effectively reduces gradient variance, prevents training collapse, and acts as a potent regularizer for robust, perception-grounded multimodal reasoning. Code will be released on https://github.com/Yzk1114/PGPO.
Zekai Ye, Qiming Li, Xiaocheng Feng +6
Harbin Institute of Technology · Peng Cheng Laboratory · Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has become an effective paradigm for improving the reasoning capability of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs). However, existing RLVR methods primarily rely on trajectory-level outcome rewards, which assign identical learning signals across all generated tokens. This coarse-grained credit assignment is fundamentally mismatched to multimodal reasoning, where only a sparse subset of tokens is causally grounded in visual evidence. Consequently, these pivotal perceptual tokens receive weak supervision and are often overwhelmed by language priors or reasoning-template tokens. To address this limitation, we propose Perception-Reinforced Policy Optimization (PRPO), a token-level reinforcement learning framework that explicitly identifies and reinforces pivotal perceptual tokens within long-horizon multimodal reasoning trajectories. PRPO introduces Robust Visual Dependency (RVD), a principled metric that identifies tokens whose predictions are both visually grounded and perturbation-stable, filtering out brittle or noisy visual tokens. Based on RVD, we further propose Perceptual Advantage Reshaping (PAR), a token-level credit assignment technique that amplifies perceptually informative tokens while preserving stable gradients for non-perceptual tokens. Extensive experiments on seven multimodal reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that PRPO consistently outperforms strong LVLM baselines across both 3B and 7B model scales, achieving average gains of 23.3% and 21.1%, respectively. PRPO achieves state-of-the-art performance with improved training efficiency and stronger cross-task generalization. Our findings highlight the importance of fine-grained credit assignment for scalable multimodal reinforcement learning.
Reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR), especially with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), has shown strong potential for improving the reasoning capabilities of large vision-language models (LVLMs). However, in multimodal reasoning, final-answer rewards are typically assigned at the sequence level and do not distinguish the functional roles of different tokens, making it difficult to determine whether a correct answer is supported by task-relevant visual evidence. In this paper, we revisit multimodal RLVR from the perspective of role-aware token-level credit assignment, where structured responses are decomposed into perception tokens for extracting visual evidence and reasoning tokens for deriving answers from that evidence. Based on this perspective, we propose Structured Role-aware Policy Optimization (SRPO), which refines the sequence-level GRPO advantage into role-aware token-level advantages without changing the reward function. Specifically, SRPO assigns role-specific credit by using self-distilled on-policy contrasts: perception tokens are emphasized according to their visual dependency under original versus corrupted visual inputs, while reasoning tokens are emphasized according to their consistency with the generated perception. These role-specific signals are further unified through a shared trajectory-level baseline, yielding positive token weights that adjust relative update magnitudes while preserving the original GRPO reward and optimization direction, without requiring external reward models or separate teachers. Experiments across diverse multimodal reasoning benchmarks show that SRPO improves evidence-grounded reasoning, highlighting the importance of moving beyond uniform sequence-level credit toward role-aware optimization for reliable multimodal reasoning.
Bingqing Jiang, Difan Zou
School of Computing & Data Science, The University of Hong Kong · School of Computing & Data Science and Institute of Data Science, The University of Hong Kong