Kernelized Advantage Estimation: From Nonparametric Statistics to LLM Reasoning

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) is a powerful paradigm for improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, existing RLVR methods typically rely on on-policy optimization from scratch, resulting in high sampling costs and inefficient utilization of accumulated experience. As model capabilities and policy behaviors evolve during training, recent attempts to reuse experience via fixed reasoning trajectories further suffer from policy mismatch. Motivated by these limitations, we argue that experience in RLVR should not be reused as fixed reasoning trajectories, but instead expressed in a policy-adaptive manner. In this work, we propose Experience-Augmented Policy Optimization (EAPO), which leverages a prior RL-optimized policy as an action-level experience prior and selectively injects experience at critical decision points during rollout. To ensure stable and unbiased learning from experience-augmented rollouts, EAPO further incorporates an adapted importance sampling scheme. Experiments on using Qwen-2.5-math 7b and Qwen-3-8B on five different benchmarks demonstrate that EAPO consistently improves reasoning performance over state-of-the-art RLVR methods.

Reinforcement learning has become the standard for improving reasoning in large language models, yet evidence increasingly suggests that RL does not teach new strategies; it redistributes probability mass over solutions the base model already contains. In this work, we ask: if RL merely steers the model toward paths it already knows, is the RL optimization loop itself necessary? Through token-level analysis across multiple model families and RL algorithms, we find that RL's beneficial footprint is a sparse, predictable correction concentrated at high-entropy decision points where the model is uncertain which branch to take. Only 1--3% of token positions are affected, the promoted token always lies within the base model's top-5 alternatives, and targeted corrections at those few positions causally recover a large fraction of RL's accuracy gain, while random corrections fail. The base model's own entropy identifies these positions without any RL-trained model, and the entire correction is low-dimensional, representable in a tiny fraction of model parameters. These findings reframe reasoning improvement as sparse policy selection, not capability acquisition. We translate this insight into ReasonMaxxer, a minimal RL-free method that applies contrastive loss only at entropy-gated decision points, using a few hundred base-model rollouts and no online generation. Across three model families, six scales, and six math reasoning benchmarks, ReasonMaxxer matches or exceeds full RL performance while requiring only tens of problems and minutes of single-GPU training, a reduction in training cost of roughly three orders of magnitude.

Reinforcement learning has become a central paradigm for improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models. Existing methods generally aim to reduce the failure probabilities induced across problems. In this paper, we introduce a moment-based perspective on policy optimization for LLM reasoning by treating the failure probability of a randomly sampled problem as a random variable and characterizing optimization objectives through its moments. Under this perspective, many existing methods optimize only a single moment of the failure-probability distribution, leaving its broader distributional structure largely uncharacterized. We propose \textbf{M}ulti-\textbf{M}oment \textbf{P}olicy \textbf{O}ptimization (MMPO), a novel policy optimization framework that jointly minimizes multiple moments of the failure-probability distribution. MMPO admits a direct operational interpretation as minimizing the expected truncated time required to obtain the first successful response. Beyond MMPO, we further develop a general moment-transformation framework that systematically induces different moment profiles and provides a unified view of a broader family of policy optimization objectives. Experiments across five mathematical reasoning benchmarks and models of different scales demonstrate that MMPO consistently outperforms strong baselines. We hope this moment-based perspective offers new insights into the design of policy optimization objectives for LLM reasoning.