KLip-PPO: A per-sample KL perspective on PPO-Clip

Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) has become the predominant algorithm for on-policy reinforcement learning due to its scalability and empirical robustness across domains. However, there is a significant disconnect between the underlying foundations of trust region methods and the heuristic clipped objective used in PPO. In this paper, we bridge this gap by introducing the Bounded Ratio Reinforcement Learning (BRRL) framework. We formulate a novel regularized and constrained policy optimization problem and derive its analytical optimal solution. We prove that this solution ensures monotonic performance improvement. To handle parameterized policy classes, we develop a policy optimization algorithm called Bounded Policy Optimization (BPO) that minimizes an advantage-weighted divergence between the policy and the analytic optimal solution from BRRL. We further establish a lower bound on the expected performance of the resulting policy in terms of the BPO loss function. Notably, our framework also provides a new theoretical lens to interpret the success of the PPO loss, and connects trust region policy optimization and the Cross-Entropy Method (CEM). We additionally extend BPO to Group-relative BPO (GBPO) for LLM fine-tuning. Empirical evaluations of BPO across MuJoCo, Atari, and complex IsaacLab environments (e.g., Humanoid locomotion), and of GBPO for LLM fine-tuning tasks, demonstrate that BPO and GBPO generally match or outperform PPO and GRPO in stability and final performance.

Group relative policy optimization for reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) typically uses a fixed importance-sampling (IS) ratio clipping boundary across all rollouts. We identify a key limitation: rare correct rollouts on harder problems and abundant correct rollouts on easier problems are clipped at comparable rates, despite contributing very different learning signals. Rollouts with low group success exhibit larger IS ratios and carry stronger gradient signal for exploration and solving new problems, yet are disproportionately suppressed by fixed clipping. To address this, we propose Group Adaptive Clipping Policy Optimization (GAPO), a plug-in modification to GRPO methods that adapts the clipping boundary to the rollout advantage. GAPO is motivated by a reverse-KL trust-region perspective, which suggests that rollouts with larger learning signal should receive proportionally greater update headroom. GAPO requires no reward shaping and preserves the standard PPO/GSPO surrogate while adapting only the clipping threshold. Across Qwen and Llama models, GAPO consistently improves both Pass@1 and Pass@k over fixed clipping and advantage-shaping baselines on math reasoning and coding benchmarks where the pass rates by the base model are relatively low.

Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) dominates reinforcement learning and LLM alignment, yet its hard-clipping mechanism and unconstrained alternatives (e.g., SPO) sit at two extremes of a stability-efficiency dilemma. We argue that this dilemma is best understood dynamically: a surrogate objective is a feedback law on the probability ratio, and its clipping/penalty shape defines a gain field that drives the update dynamics. PPO's clip induces a dead zone (zero feedback outside the trust region), leaving the policy to drift open-loop under momentum; SPO's quadratic penalty induces an unbounded, linearly growing gain that stiffens the dynamics and destabilizes under aggressive step sizes. Guided by this view, we derive Anchored Neighborhood Optimization (ANO), which designs the gain field directly: a $C^\infty$ shaping kernel that anchors the identity map at $r{=}1$, peaks exactly at a prescribed trust-region boundary $1{+}ε$, bounds the push on severely off-policy samples by a tunable $κ_{+}$, and exerts a bounded, redescending pull of tunable depth $κ_{-}$ on extreme outliers. The three hyperparameters have decoupled roles, and all internal constants are solved in closed form. Empirically, ANO ranks first on both Atari (40 games) and MuJoCo in IQM and Median of normalized scores. While the runner-up differs across domains (PAPO on Atari, SPO on MuJoCo), ANO is the only method consistently at the top. Under a learning-rate stress test ($3\times10^{-4}\!\to\!10^{-3}$), ANO degrades by only $0.9\%$ whereas PPO collapses by $54.5\%$, and the stressed ANO still outperforms PPO and PAPO at their best-tuned learning rates.