Hint-based reinforcement learning addresses reward sparsity in long-horizon agentic tasks by retaining a prefix of an expert trajectory before each rollout, letting the policy explore from a state closer to success. Its effectiveness hinges on the guidance depth: how much of the trajectory to keep. Existing methods treat this depth as a deterministic scalar. Scheduled approaches share one value across samples and ignore per-task heterogeneity; per-sample probing estimates it separately at the cost of extra rollouts. We find that useful guidance occupies a band of depths whose informativeness profile is approximately Gaussian around the band center, rather than concentrating at a single optimal point. We propose Agent-G2, a Gaussian guidance framework that draws the depth per task from a Gaussian whose center and spread are estimated online from rollouts already collected for policy optimization, requiring no probe rollouts or learned depth predictor. The center combines a global baseline with per-cluster difficulty, and the spread tracks within-cluster variance. We evaluate Agent-G2 on ALFWorld and WebShop on Qwen2.5-1.5B / 7B-Instruct. Agent-G2 outperforms the strongest hint-based, hint-free, and Aux-RL baselines on ALFWorld by 2.3 / 3.9 / 7.4 points at under one-third the rollout cost of per-sample probing.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Hint-based RL paradigms across training steps t0,t1,t2 . (a) Schedule-based: shared dt across samples. (b) Probe-based: O(logn) per-sample probes. (c) Agent-G 2 (ours): di∼N(μt,σt2) per task, estimated online from existing rollouts.
Figure 2: Scalar-depth schedulers misallocate guidance. (a) Shared-depth schedulers keep fewer than half of assignments in-range; (b) per-sample probing lowers the mismatch ratio ρ only by spending extra rollouts.
Figure 3: Useful guidance forms a band around di⋆ . (a) Rollout success rate pi(d) vs. depth, with under-/in-range/over-guided regimes shaded; the in-range band spans several depths. (b) Bernoulli-variance informativeness aligned by Δd=d−di⋆ , with a Gaussian fit ( σ=0.22 , R2=0.92 ).
Figure 4: Agent-G 2 pipeline. (1) Tasks are clustered offline by difficulty. (2) A global baseline μglobal and per-cluster statistics (Ak,Vk) form a per-task Gaussian N(μi,σi2) . (3) One prefix length is drawn per task; R rollouts run from the post-prefix state. (4) The policy is updated with prefix SFT plus GRPO loss. (5) The same rollouts refresh μglobal,Ak,Vk for the next batch.
Type
Method
ALFWorld
WebShop
Short
Medium
Long
All
Score
Succ
Pick
Look
Clean
Heat
Cool
Pick2
Closed-Source Models
Prompting
GPT-4o ( OpenAI et al. 2024 )
75.3
60.8
31.2
56.7
21.6
49.8
48.0
31.8
23.7
Prompting
Gemini-2.5-Pro ( Comanici et al. 2025 )
92.8
63.3
62.1
69.0
26.6
58.7
60.3
42.5
35.9
Base: Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct
Table 1: Main results on ALFWorld and WebShop (success rate, %). Best and second-best are highlighted.
Figure 5: Beyond imitation. (a) ALFWorld success on Qwen2.5-1.5B: Agent-G 2 (95%) far exceeds Full SFT (56%) and Sampled-Prefix SFT (27%). (b) Per-cluster (Short / Medium / Long) depth densities at t=29 .
Figure 6: Training dynamics of Agent-G 2 . (a) Success rate vs. gradient steps for Agent-G 2 and the strongest scalar-depth baseline. (b) Evolution of the per-task guidance-depth distribution across training.
Method
Type
Cost/step (s)
Ratio
Agent-G 2
Distribution
88
1.00×
Step decay
Schedule
57
0.65×
Cosine decay
Schedule
60
0.68×
Linear decay
Schedule
61
0.69×
Target acc
Schedule
80
0.91×
Enumeration
Probe
425
4.83×
Table 2: Per-step training cost on Qwen2.5-1.5B / ALFWorld. Median wall-clock seconds per gradient step. Ratios are relative to Agent-G 2 .
Variant
Long
All
Δ
Agent-G 2
94.7
95.3
–
Sampling form
w/o sampling: di,j=μi,σi=0
84.6
89.8
↓5.5
Uniform sampling: U[μi±σi]
80.8
88.3
↓7.0
Adaptive moments
w/o adaptive center: μi=μglobal
79.2
91.4
↓3.9
Table 3: Ablation of Agent-G 2 on ALFWorld / Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct. Δ is the change in All relative to the full method. Removing LGRPO is equivalent to Sampled-Prefix SFT.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Step
n
Fix-step
Linear
Step-dec
Tar-acc
10
28
67.9
42.9
42.9
32.1
20
28
64.3
39.3
39.3
35.7
40
28
75.0
57.1
57.1
50.0
80
58
48.3
55.2
55.2
41.4
160
45
71.1
55.6
55.6
40.0
Avg
—
65.3
50.0
50.0
39.8
Appendix
Table 4: Mismatch ratio ρ of shared-depth schedulers across five training checkpoints on Qwen2.5-1.5B / ALFWorld. n is the number of diagnostic tasks at that step.
Hyperparameter
Symbol
Value
Agent-G 2 -specific
Global baseline step
Δ
0.1
Cluster EMA rate
α
0.2
Center scale
λ
1.0
Variance scale
γ
1.0
Variance floor
σmin
0.1
Appendix
Table 5: Agent-G 2 hyperparameters. Shared across ALFWorld and WebShop unless noted. Hint-based RL baselines reuse the Policy optimization , Rollout , and Training schedule blocks.
Training Stage
σ
R2
n
Early (ckpts 0 – 50 )
0.198
0.906
116
Mid (ckpts 50 – 100 )
0.206
0.888
146
Late (ckpts 100 – 150 )
0.231
0.936
109
Appendix
Table 6: Gaussian fit of the aligned informativeness profile across training windows on Qwen2.5-1.5B / ALFWorld. Each window pools (Δd,pi(d)(1−pi(d))) pairs collected within the listed checkpoint range; n counts pairs entering the least-squares fit.
Figure 7: Four-phase snapshot of the per-cluster Gaussian schedule on Qwen2.5-1.5B / ALFWorld. Each panel shows the density N(μk,σk2) for the K=3 horizon clusters (Short, Medium, Long) at one training step. Their batch-weighted mixture yields the aggregate in Figure 6 (b).
Method
Configuration
Imitation
Full SFT
LR 1×10−5 , ∣B∣=32 , 2 epochs
RL without hints
GRPO
Table 5 with di=0
GiGPO
authors’ default
BEACON
authors’ default
Appendix
Table 7: Baseline configurations. Hint-based RL baselines reuse the training blocks of Table 5 ; only the depth-assignment rule differs.
Figure 8: Per-cluster schedule trajectories on Qwen2.5-1.5B / ALFWorld. Each row shows one horizon cluster ( k1 Short, k2 Medium, k3 Long); columns plot μt and σt over training steps.
Clustering signal
K
All
None
1
89.1
Length quantile
3
95.3±2.3
Length quantile
5
96.5±1.9
Length quantile
10
86.2
Random
3
89.4
Appendix
Table 8: Clustering design ablation on Qwen2.5-1.5B / ALFWorld (success rate %). Length-quantile bins tasks by horizon; random samples a partition uniformly. ± values are 5 -seed standard deviations. K=1 and length-quantile K=3 are reproduced from Table 3 .
Reinforcement learning studies how agents learn sequential decisions from rewards and interaction, balancing exploration, performance, safety, and adaptation.
Recent agentic reinforcement learning methods use hindsight to complement sparse outcome rewards. However, a completed rollout can yield many such signals, leaving their appropriate allocation across turns unclear. We introduce TRIAL, a trajectory-relative hindsight distillation framework with a unified turn-aligned scoring protocol. For each decision turn, TRIAL extracts an outcome view of that decision's realized consequence and evaluates the same response under ordinary and hindsight-conditioned contexts. The signed log-probability gap determines the direction and local strength of token-level supervision, while turn-level magnitudes are normalized jointly over the realized trajectory. The resulting allocation multipliers have an eligible-token-weighted mean of one, redistributing dense supervision across turns while fixing its average multiplier. Experiments on WebShop and ALFWorld with different backbones show that TRIAL outperforms GRPO across all eight combinations of backbone, environment, and evaluation metric, while achieving the best or tied-best performance among six methods on six of them. On WebShop with Qwen3-1.7B, TRIAL improves the success rate from 56.4% to 75.2% and the task score from 78.7% to 85.7%. Controlled ablations further show that trajectory-relative turn allocation provides substantial gains beyond those of dense hindsight distillation alone.
Haoyu Zheng, Yun Zhu, Qing Wang +1
Zhejiang University · Tencent · Shanghai AI Laboratory
Agentic reinforcement learning (RL) for Large Language Models (LLMs) critically depends on the exploration capability of the base policy, as training signals emerge only within its in-capability region. For tasks where the base policy cannot reach reward states, additional training or external guidance is needed to recover effective learning signals. Rather than relying on costly iterative supervised fine tuning (SFT), we exploit the abundant action data generated in everyday human interactions. We propose ActGuide-RL, which injects action data as plan-style reference guidance, enabling the agentic policy to overcome reachability barriers to reward states. Guided and unguided rollouts are then jointly optimized via mixed-policy training, internalizing the exploration gains back into the unguided policy. Motivated by a theoretical and empirical analysis of the benefit-risk trade-off, we adopt a minimal intervention principle that invokes guidance only as an adaptive fallback, matching task difficulty while minimizing off-policy risk. On search-agent benchmarks, ActGuide-RL substantially improves over zero RL (+10.7 pp on GAIA and +19 pp on XBench with Qwen3-4B), and performs on par with the SFT+RL pipeline without any cold start. This suggests a new paradigm for agentic RL that reduces the reliance on heavy SFT data by using scalable action guidance instead.
Yuxiang Ji, Zengbin Wang, Yong Wang +6
1Xiamen University · 2AMAP, Alibaba Group · Work done during internship at AMAP, Alibaba Group +1
Long-horizon language-model agents trained with reinforcement learning oftenreceive sparse outcome rewards that do not reveal which decisions along a tra-jectory deserve credit. Episode-level advantages provide coarse trajectory-widecredit, while step-level comparisons offer finer resolution with context-dependentestimation noise. We propose Granularity-Adaptive Credit Assignment (GACA),a critic-free method that adaptively mixes episode- and step-level credit for eachdecision during policy optimization. GACA normalizes the sampled response'smean per-token negative log-likelihood (NLL) within each trajectory and uses theresulting criticality score to determine the step-specific mixture. The computationreuses rollout log-probabilities without additional training rollouts or model eval-uations. Our analysis characterizes optimal score-dependent mixing and derivesconditions linking expected NLL to a lower bound on the preferred step-levelweight. Across ALFWorld and WebShop with 1.5B and 7B backbones, GACAachieves the highest reported mean success rates among the compared methods,while introducing negligible additional computation.
Taoran Liang, Yang Liu, Shang Luo +10
Nankai University · Peking University · Supply Chain Tech Team Y, JD.com +2