Reinforcement learning (RL) with verifiable rewards has achieved strong progress in reasoning-oriented LLMs, but extending it to multi-domain RL remains challenging due to reward unreliability in non-verifiable tasks and capability interference across domains. We propose CARE-RL to combine protocol-aware reward generation with capability-aware optimization for mitigating cross-domain conflicts. For non-verifiable tasks, the Protocol-Aware Generative Reward Model (PA-GRM) constructs prompt-level evaluation protocols and schemas before producing trace-conditioned rewards, enabling task-adaptive yet comparable evaluation of open-ended responses. For multi-domain optimization, Direction-Aware Capability Subspace Projection (DACSP) extracts historical capability directions from previous RL stages and modulates later updates by amplifying aligned components, suppressing conflicting components, and preserving orthogonal updates. Experiments across math, chat, and instruction-following benchmarks show that CARE-RL consistently outperforms standard multi-domain RL baselines, achieving Total Avg scores of 47.9 and 50.7 on Qwen2.5-7B and Qwen3-4B, respectively.
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) plays a key role in stimulating the explicit reasoning capability of Large Language Models (LLMs). We can achieve expert-level performance in some specific domains via RLVR, such as coding or math. When a general multi-domain expert-level model is required, we need to carefully consider the collaboration of RLVR across different domains. The current state-of-the-art models mainly employ two different training paradigms for multi-domain RLVR: mixed multi-task RLVR and separate RLVR followed by model merging. However, most of the works did not provide a detailed comparison and analysis about these paradigms. To this end, we choose multiple commonly used high-level tasks (e.g., math, coding, science, instruction following, and agent) as our target domains and design extensive qualitative and quantitative experiments using open-source datasets. We find the RLVR across domains exhibits small mutual interferences, and reasoning-intensive domains have mutually synergistic effects. Furthermore, we analyze the internal mechanisms from the perspectives of information constraints, model prediction behavior and self-verification. Our homepage is at https://github.com/Mosi-AI/M2RL.
Reinforcement learning (RL) post-training improves large language models (LLMs) on individual domains such as mathematical reasoning, code generation, question answering, and creative writing (CW), but training on one domain often degrades performance on others. Existing explanations based on catastrophic forgetting or global gradient conflict are incomplete: substantial interference can occur even when full-model gradients are nearly orthogonal. We show that single-domain RL produces sparse, small-magnitude parameter edits with weak overlap among top-changed neurons, while different domains still share substantial active computation routes on which update directions determine whether they act synergistically or conflict. Guided by this observation, we prove under a local perturbation model of multi-domain RL that later-domain training harms an earlier domain mainly through a second-order damage term, which under the observed sparse route structure concentrates in a low-dimensional shared conflict subspace. Moreover, a short domain refresh contracts the harmful component on this subspace, enabling selective recovery with limited collateral damage. Consistent with the theory, a brief Re-Math refresh after Code → Math → QA → CW recovers Math from 57.66 to 66.04 while largely preserving performance on the other domains, yielding the best average score of 66.39. Beyond refresh, a training-free rollback on a sparse proxy conflict coordinate set for the Math-QA pair partially restores Math, providing direct proxy-level evidence for localized damage. These results provide a localized mechanistic account of interference and recovery in multi-domain RL.
Cross-domain task-oriented dialogue requires reasoning over implicit and explicit feasibility constraints while planning long-horizon, multi-turn actions. Large language models (LLMs) can infer such constraints but are unreliable over long horizons, while Reinforcement learning (RL) optimizes long-horizon behavior yet cannot recover constraints from raw dialogue. Naively coupling LLMs with RL is therefore brittle: unverified or unstructured LLM outputs can corrupt state representations and misguide policy learning. Motivated by this, we propose Verified LLM-Knowledge empowered RL (VLK-RL), a hybrid framework that makes LLM-derived constraint reasoning usable for RL. VLK-RL first elicits candidate constraints with an LLM and then verifies them via a dual-role cross-examination procedure to suppress hallucinations and cross-turn inconsistencies. The verified constraints are mapped into ontology-aligned slot-value representations, yielding a structured, constraint-aware state for RL policy optimization. Experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate that VLK-RL significantly improves generalization and robustness, outperforming strong single-model baselines on long-horizon tasks.