Measuring Learning Progress via Gradient-Momentum Coupling

Effective machine learning depends not only on how we model data, but also on what data we choose to collect. While large sequence models have revolutionized data modeling, the problem of automated data selection, or "intrinsic curiosity", remains a significant challenge. Classic approaches incentivize exploration by rewarding an agent based on its "learning progress", which measures how much a newly acquired observation improves a world model's predictive ability. However, evaluating these rewards traditionally requires expensive inner loops of gradient descent updates within each trajectory, rendering them computationally impractical at scale. In this work, we investigate whether the emergent in-context learning (ICL) capabilities of sequence models can eliminate this bottleneck by serving as immediate, update-free world models. Specifically, we evaluate whether an exploration policy can be trained to maximize learning progress, using solely the prediction errors and counterfactual context manipulations of an in-context learner. We first prove that in general Markov decision processes, this is in fact impossible in an unbiased way: the resulting intrinsic rewards either suffer from nuisance terms that bias their estimation of true learning progress, or they cannot be implemented using an in-context learner's prediction errors. Conversely, we prove a positive result for a broad subclass of non-temporal settings, encompassing active learning and Bayesian Experimental Design: here, ICL-derived rewards successfully bound and asymptotically converge to the true learning progress. We corroborate our theory with controlled experiments across continuous and symbolic environments, demonstrating that our ICL-driven framework successfully trains curious data-collection policies that explore optimally.

We develop a first-principles reduced-order model of these dynamics. Under a single mean-field assumption that summarizes the policy by its expected reward, we reduce the GRPO update to a stochastically-forced damped oscillator whose mass, damping, and stiffness are fixed in closed form by the optimizer hyperparameters together with a single measured curvature scale -- momentum supplies the inertia, off-policy lag erodes the damping, and the group size enters, to leading order, as a noise temperature. The reduction has three consequences. First, it subsumes the empirical single-exponential saturation law as its overdamped limit, recasting the fitted plateau, timescale, and size exponent as the fixed point, inverse stiffness, and curvature-scaling exponent of the underlying potential, and adding, through the retained inertial term, the slow-start phase the single exponential cannot represent. Second, it yields predictions tied to independently measurable quantities rather than fitted ones: group-size invariance of the deterministic trajectory with a $1/G$ stationary fluctuation, a sharp stability threshold in the refresh interval, and an overdamped-to-oscillatory transition. Third, it furnishes diagnostics that separate failure modes a reward curve alone conflates -- reward hacking, advantage degeneracy, policy concentration, and dynamical instability. Across three models and two group sizes, the closed-form trajectory fits training reward to $R^2 \geq 0.91$ and the mean trajectory is group-size invariant to leading order -- on both the reward curve and out-of-distribution transfer to eight math benchmarks -- while the within-group reward spread retains a residual $G$-dependence that the leading-order temperature picture does not capture.

Reinforcement learning has become a cornerstone for aligning and unlocking the reasoning capabilities of large-scale models. At its core, the training loop of GRPO and its variants alternates between rollout sampling and policy update: the policy first samples rollouts from its action space, and then updates its parameters according to the advantages computed over them. Unlike supervised learning, where each gradient step is anchored to an explicit ground-truth target, the optimal gradient direction for updating model parameters in this setting is not known a priori; the high-quality rollouts drawn during the sampling stage therefore act as the implicit "teacher" that guides every parameter update. However, mainstream RL algorithms such as GRPO adopt a simple sampling scheme that conditions all rollouts on the same original prompt. When a task lies beyond the policy model's current capability, this sampling scheme rarely yields a high-quality rollout, leaving the policy model without a meaningful gradient direction when updating its parameters, which causes training to stall. To address this issue, we propose FBOS-RL. Specifically, we let the model perform Feedback-Guided Exploration Enhancement based on the feedback provided by the environment, and on top of this we design two mutually reinforcing training objectives: EPA and ECC. Extensive experiments demonstrate that EPA and ECC can mutually reinforce each other, forming a positive flywheel effect that significantly improves both the training efficiency and the final performance ceiling of reinforcement learning. Specifically, under both an identical number of rollouts and the same number of training steps, FBOS-RL learns substantially faster than GRPO and feedback-based baselines and ultimately attains a higher performance ceiling, while exhibiting higher policy entropy and lower gradient norms throughout training.