Policy optimization (PO) for Large Language Models faces a stability--exploration trade-off, currently mediated by an action-side Policy-KL regularizer. This puts practitioners in a double bind: keeping Policy-KL constrains response behavior and consumes the action-side exploration budget, while dropping it leaves the optimization without an explicit drift control. We argue for an alternative that breaks the dilemma by moving regularization to the input side. As training progresses, the distribution over training queries induced by the current policy drifts unchecked from its pre-RL reference distribution. Concretely, Environment-Regularized Policy Optimization (ERPO) introduces a Query-KL (QKL) term that bounds this query distribution shift, together with a dataset-static reference-derived per-query weight that biases each per-query update toward queries typical under the reference. The QKL gradient flows strictly through the query likelihood; the response score function used by policy-gradient estimators does not appear in the QKL term, so QKL exerts no direct gradient pressure on the response distribution---exploration is preserved. ERPO plugs into GRPO/PPO/REINFORCE-style pipelines without additional forward passes. On six mathematical reasoning benchmarks, ERPO replaces the standard Policy-KL regularizer while achieving effective control over query distribution drift, delivering stronger accuracy and substantially more stable behavior under high-temperature decoding and long-horizon training. Our source code are available at https://github.com/AlibabaResearch/ERPO
Figures & tables
Figure 1: KL losses during GRPO training. The Query-KL (dark) rises while the Policy-KL (light) stays low, showing action-only KL does not stabilize the query process.
Figure 2: Comparison of the GRPO and ERPO Computation Flows. Given a query q and its output o , the policy model θ and the reference model θ0 induce query distributions ρθ(q) and ρθ0(q) , as well as output distributions ρθ(o) and ρθ0(o) . The GRPO-like flow (red) applies policy-level KL regularization to the output distributions and optimizes the standard within-query advantage. In contrast, the ERPO-like flow (green) measures query-distribution drift through DKL(query) for environmental regularization and reweights the advantage at the query level using wB(q)=f(ρθ0(q)) (Section 4.2 ).
Figure 3: Avg@32 over Sampling Temperatures on Mathematical Reasoning Tasks
Mean Avg@32
Method
AIME24
AIME25
AMC
MATH500
Minerva
Olympiad
Avg.
Base
0.087
0.030
0.246
0.340
0.058
0.099
0.143
GRPO
0.174
0.072
0.398
0.528
0.207
0.266
0.274
ERPO
0.218
0.110
0.478
0.677
0.214
0.316
0.336
Mean Pass@32
Base
0.373
0.206
0.674
0.764
0.349
0.411
0.463
Table 1: Performance comparison across mathematical reasoning benchmarks. Best results per column are highlighted in bold.
Figure 4: Training Dynamics on ERPO
Figure 5: Training Dynamics on Long-term RL
Figure 6: Performance Variation Across Training Steps
Base Model
Method
α
w(s)
Rollout Count
Temperature Metrics
0.1
0.6
1
1.5
≤1.0
1.2–1.5
Baseline
—
—
—
—
52.40
46.80
32.80
0.40
44.44
6.15
Qwen-7B
GRPO
1×10−2
—
8
66.80
68.40
73.80
0.40
68.80
12.50
GRPO w/ w(s)
1×10−2
✓
8
78.20
76.80
71.20
7.60
76.14
23.79
GRPO w/ query-KL
1×10−2
—
8
81.60
81.60
79.00
2.60
80.90
38.00
ERPO
1×10−2
✓
8
79.40
80.60
75.20
8.60
78.74
37.90
Table 2: Performance Comparison Under Different Experimental Settings
Method
Query-KL
Policy-KL
Entropy
GRPO (Avg@3)
0.9679
0.0601
0.5063
GRPO w/ wB(s)
0.5933
0.0113
0.2782
GRPO w/Query-KL
0.0041
0.1001
0.5674
ERPO (Avg@3)
0.0828
0.0728
0.4244
Table 3: Influence of Query-KL and Query-Reweighting on Training Stability
Figure 7: Pass@1 accuracy and training dynamics under different settings: (a)–(c) Model performance at various temperatures on MATH500; (d) Policy - KL divergence variation with GRPO using only Query - KL.
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 8: Variation of Metrics with Temperature
Method
Avg. Train Acc
Avg. Eval@TP1
Avg. Eval@TP2
Gap@TP1
Gap@TP2
Avg. Gap
GRPO
77.3
69.8
70.1
7.5
5.5
6.47
ERPO
77.1
74.1
73.8
3.0
3.3
3.14
Improvement
–
–
–
↓4.5 (60%)
↓2.2 (40%)
↓3.33 (51%)
Appendix
Table 4: Quantification of Reward Hacking via Train–Inference Gap. The table compares the average accuracy during training sampling versus inference decoding. A larger gap indicates severe reward hacking (overfitting to training dynamics). ERPO reduces this gap by ≈51% , demonstrating robust generalization.
Model / Metric
Step-0
Step-40
Step-80
Step-120
Step-160
Step-200
Step-240
Avg.
GRPO (Baseline)
Train Acc
44.48
76.41
76.09
78.29
78.95
79.44
76.70
72.91
Eval@TP1
31.20
73.20
76.00
73.40
72.20
73.60
58.40
65.43
Eval@TP2
30.60
74.00
74.80
74.20
76.60
75.80
66.20
67.46
ERPO (Ours)
Train Acc
44.55
75.63
76.53
78.66
80.63
78.41
81.46
73.70
Appendix
Table 5: Trajectory of Train vs. Inference Accuracy. Detailed performance recorded at 40-step intervals. Note the divergence in GRPO at Step-240, where Eval accuracy drops significantly while Train accuracy remains high—a clear sign of reward hacking. ERPO maintains consistency throughout.
Figure 9: Likelihood Relationship between Query and Response
Base Model
Method
D_KL
Rollout
Temperature
0.1
0.6
1
1.5
≤ 1.0
1.2-1.5
Baseline
–
–
–
52.4
46.8
32.8
0.4
44.44
6.15
Qwen-7B
GRPO
Policy
8
66.8
68.4
73.8
0.4
68.8
12.5
16
73.0
79.2
75.0
10.6
75.22
39.75
ERPO
Query
8
79.4
80.6
75.2
8.6
78.74 (+9.94)
37.9
16
80.4
78.8
74.4
56.2
77.82 (+2.6)
66.25
Appendix
Table 6: Performance Comparison Under Different Experimental Settings
Asynchronous reinforcement learning (RL) for large language model (LLM) agents trains one policy on trajectories generated by another: rollouts come from stale checkpoints, and the inference engine's probabilities differ from the trainer's even at identical parameters. Standard remedies either clip importance ratios, which biases the update, or, as in GRPO, sample a group of responses per prompt, which is costly when episodes are long. We propose KL-Regularized Policy Optimization (KLPO), a framework that anchors the KL regularizer at the sampler. The regularized improvement step then has a closed-form Gibbs solution, and KLPO fits its log-ratio optimality condition by least squares on the sampler's own trajectories, so the sampler probability enters through a log-ratio and no importance weights are needed. Profiling out the regression intercept replaces the intractable log-partition function with the signal's sampler mean plus a sampler-to-trainer KL divergence. For token-level policy mirror descent targets, we show that the resulting gradient can be computed from terminal returns without a critic, via sampler-centered scores or a single trajectory residual, even under stochastic tool outputs. We further prove that independent Monte Carlo estimates of the KL term keep these gradients unbiased, derive the exact KL gap of cheaper top-K and binary approximations, and show that SPPO, GPO, REBEL, and BPO arise as special cases of KLPO. The result is a critic-free update that uses one rollout per prompt and requires neither a learned normalizer nor a group of responses.
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has become the standard paradigm for LLM mathematical reasoning, where Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) serves as the mainstream algorithm. We point out two understudied inefficiencies existing in GRPO. First, the fixed KL penalty coefficient overly restricts policy exploration at stages where the model requires significant deviation from the reference policy. Second, uniform sampling of training questions ignores that moderately difficult problems provide the most informative gradient signals for optimization. We propose Exploration-Prioritized Policy Optimization (EXPO) with two lightweight plug-in modules. The Accuracy-Conditioned KL Scaling (AKL) dynamically adjusts KL regularization strength through a smooth nonlinear function of batch average accuracy, relaxing the penalty when the model underperforms and strengthening it when the model achieves good results. The Gaussian Curriculum Sampling (GCS) assigns sampling weights to questions following a Gaussian distribution centered at moderate accuracy around 0.5, focusing training on the model's learning frontier. We conduct extensive experiments on DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-1.5B and Qwen3-8B-Base over six mathematical reasoning benchmarks. The results show EXPO steadily surpasses vanilla GRPO. It obtains an absolute gain of 13.34 on AIME 2025 pass@32, rising from 63.33 percent to 76.67 percent, and achieves an average pass@32 improvement of 2.66 on the 8B model. The much larger performance gains on pass@32 compared with pass@1 demonstrate that EXPO effectively enlarges the model's exploration boundary under a fixed inference cost budget.
Reinforcement learning (RL) is a key paradigm for post-training large language models (LLMs), but the widely used Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) often suffers from entropy collapse: exploration quickly disappears, policies converge prematurely, and sample diversity declines, ultimately harming training effectiveness. Existing remedies, including entropy bonuses and clip-based methods, rarely keep entropy within a stable exploration regime and often introduce oscillatory entropy or reward degradation. In this work, we identify a previously overlooked asymmetry in entropy dynamics: under high-temperature sampling, positive and negative samples have opposite effects on policy entropy. Specifically, high-temperature positive samples promote entropy growth, whereas negative samples suppress it. We provide a qualitative theoretical explanation for this phenomenon: when entropy decreases during policy updates, its derivative with respect to temperature is strictly positive under positive sample updates, indicating that high-temperature positive samples can counteract entropy decay, thereby slowing entropy collapse and potentially reversing it. Motivated by this insight, we propose SCOPE-RL, a stable entropy control framework through a regularization term constructed from temperature-adaptive positive samples. Extensive experiments show that SCOPE-RL consistently outperforms strong RL baselines on both Pass@1 and Pass@k. Our results provide evidence that escaping entropy collapse can improve reasoning performance, while our quantitative empirical analysis further reveals a non-monotonic entropy-performance relationship, with an optimal level of exploration for RL post-training in reasoning LLMs. Our code is available at https://github.com/597358816/SCOPE-RL.
Chen Wang, Zhaochun Li, Jionghao Bai +4
College of Software, Nankai University · Zhongguancun Academy · Beijing Institute of Technology +2