Recent advances in tool-integrated language agents have significantly improved their ability to solve complex reasoning tasks. However, existing alignment methods predominantly focus on maximizing task accuracy, while overlooking auxiliary objectives such as tool-use efficiency, which are essential for practical deployment. To address this gap, we introduce ParetoPO, a two-stage multi-objective optimization framework for aligning tool-using large language models (LLMs) under competing objectives. In the first stage, ParetoPO leverages hypervolume-guided dynamic scalarization to adapt reward weights based on global Pareto frontier progress. In the second stage, it replaces scalarized learning signals with Pareto-ranking-based advantage computation, promoting nondominated trajectories through dominance-aware credit assignment. This design enables fine-grained, action-level optimization across multiple conflicting objectives. Experimental results on mathematic reasoning and multi-hop QA tasks show that ParetoPO consistently discovers policies with superior accuracy-efficiency trade-offs compared to static and heuristic baselines.
Agentic reinforcement learning (RL) equips large language models (LLMs) with tool-use capabilities that substantially improve reasoning on complex tasks. However, integrating external tools often destabilizes training: over-reliance on tools can induce input distribution shift, while overly conservative tool use limits effective exploration. To address this issue, we propose a unified framework TAO-RL that couples tool-aware trajectory filtering with entropy-guided exploration for efficient policy optimization. Specifically, at the data level, TAO-RL filters rollout trajectories along two criteria: discarding those where all tool invocations fail to execute, and removing those where all rollouts are either correct or incorrect, as both cases yield degenerate advantage estimates that contribute no discriminative learning signal. This joint filtering retains data that are both tool-capable and informative, establishing a high-quality training distribution. At the algorithmic level, we introduce a tool-aware entropy-guided bonus that reshapes the advantage function at post-tool-call tokens, encouraging the policy to explore more diverse reasoning paths at critical decision points. These two components are mutually reinforcing: trajectory filtering establishes a clean and informative training foundation, while entropy-guided exploration drives stronger reasoning behaviors at critical tool-interaction junctures. Extensive experiments on 7 challenging reasoning benchmarks across 3 model scales demonstrate the superiority of TAO-RL over existing methods.
Group Relative Policy Optimization(GRPO) has become a cornerstone of modern reinforcement learning alignment, prized for its efficacy in foregoing an explicit value-critic by leveraging reward normalization across sampled trajectory cohorts. However, the method's reliance on a monolithic statistical baseline, such as the group mean, collapses the relational topology of the trajectory space into a single scalar, thereby erasing the fine-grained preference information essential for navigating complex, rank-sensitive reward landscapes. To address this issue, we introduce a novel framework, Lambda Policy Optimization (LambdaPO), that addresses this information-theoretic bottleneck by re-conceptualizing advantage estimation from a scalar value to a decomposed, pairwise preference structure. Specifically, the advantage for any given trajectory is formulated as the integrated sum of reward differentials against all peers in its cohort, where each pairwise comparison is dynamically attenuated by the policy's own probabilistic confidence in the established preference. To further mitigate the sparsity of binary outcome supervision, we augment the objective with a semantic density reward, derived from the precision-recall alignment between generated reasoning traces and ground-truth solutions. As a result, our method can mine more fine-grained optimization signals from a group of rollouts, guiding the LLM to a better optima. Experimental results across challenging math reasoning and question-answering tasks demonstrates that LambdaPO improves performance compared to the baseline methods.
Enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language model (LLM) agents requires effective orchestration of diverse expert models and tools. However, existing frameworks typically call APIs, based on coarse-grained matching between tasks and the functions of expert models or tools, while overlooking critical factors such as performance variability and cost efficiency among functionally similar alternatives. To address this, we propose Agora, a framework that uses a confidence-calibrated auction to dynamically allocate tasks to expert models and tools. By treating reasoning steps as tradeable items, Agora bases allocation on calibrated competence rather than raw confidence. Across five main benchmarks, Agora improves or remains competitive with single-model, routing, and cascade baselines under matched candidate pools.