Don't Let Gains FADE: Breaking Down Policy Gradient Weights in RL
Authors: Juliette Decugis, Sean O'Brien, Francis Bach, Gabriel Synnaeve, Taco Cohen
Organizations: FAIR at Meta · Work done at Meta, now working at the University of California, San Diego · Inria, Ecole Normale Supérieure
Abstract
Reinforcement learning post-training dramatically improves LLM reasoning, but suffers from training instability and diversity collapse. Advantage functions offer an appealing fix: they reshape the training objective, reweight which rollouts drive learning, and are trivial to implement. Yet a proliferation of methods makes it unclear which advantage to use and when. We cut through the confusion with a unifying framework that decomposes any advantage into its positive and negative gradient mass along two orthogonal axes. On the sign axis, imbalanced updates collapse either entropy or weight geometry. On the difficulty axis, hard-problem focus sharpens signal but costs sample size. Both trade-offs shift during training: exploration favors balance and hard focus; exploitation favors suppression and medium focus. This motivates FADE (Focal Advantage with Dynamic Entropy), a self-adapting advantage that reads training dynamics to schedule the gradient weight automatically. FADE reaches peak pass@1 20k steps earlier than the best static baseline at the 7B scale and 2k steps earlier at the 32B , while achieving the best accuracy-diversity trade-off across all pass@k on LiveCodeBench and AIME.
RL with verifiable rewards can substantially improve LLM reasoning, yet standard GRPO-style training often treats easy, hard, and learnable questions alike through uniform sampling and weighting, leading to inefficient compute allocation. We study GRPO by tracking token log-probabilities, group-normalized advantages, and the induced token-level update weights. This reveals three recurring dynamics as training proceeds: (1) confidence inflation, (2) advantage contraction, and (3) hierarchical convergence. These findings suggest that the utility of each update depends strongly on both question difficulty and the model's current competence. Motivated by this, we propose Confidence and Difficulty-adaptive Policy Optimization (CoDaPO), which assigns each question a bounded value from rollout confidence and empirical difficulty. CoDaPO then uses this value to reweight policy updates and resample high-value learnable questions within mini-batches, thereby increasing discovery within the learnable band under a fixed compute budget. Across twelve benchmarks, CoDaPO consistently improves accuracy over existing RL methods. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/tmlr-group/CoDaPO.
The standard LLM training pipeline applies reinforcement learning (RL) only after pre-training and supervised fine-tuning (SFT). We question this status quo by training a LLM from scratch and applying RL, SFT, and SFT followed by RL directly to intermediate pre-training checkpoints. We find that RL is effective very early, and often matches the full SFT→RL pipeline early as well. Through experiments on harder problems, we find that targeted pre-training data composition is a strong lever for RL effectiveness, even more so than model scale. Beyond reasoning accuracy, applying RL directly to base checkpoints expands the model's distribution; the sharpening effect reported in recent work arises only when RL follows SFT. The general capabilities of the model remain essentially unchanged by RL, while they degrade following SFT. Finally, we merge RL and SFT objectives by parallel averaging, which outperforms across all other training methods discussed, across metrics, while preserving general capabilities. Together, these results suggest that LLM training might benefit from an expanded use of RL.
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards is widely used for post-training reasoning models, but sparse outcome rewards make exploration difficult. A complementary approach is to optimize inference-time objectives such as pass@K and max@K directly, yet existing policy-gradient estimators for these objectives use different signals, baselines, and normalizations, making their relationships unclear. We study this issue through baseline design and advantage centering. Starting from the advantage estimator of a leading method in the field, we show that it is policy-gradient unbiased but yields a non-centered advantage. We then introduce a Leave-Two-Out baseline that preserves policy-gradient unbiasedness while making realized batch advantages exactly centered. The resulting method, MaxPO, has an efficient quadratic-time implementation and integrates naturally into group-based RL for LLM post-training. We further derive the canonical finite-batch advantage for max@K, providing a unified view of existing advantage estimators. Empirically, we verify that the L2O baseline reduces gradient variance and outperforms non-centered alternatives.
Shota Takashiro, Soichiro Nishimori, Paavo Parmas +6