cs.AISep 16, 2026

Compositional Reasoning in Language Models under Reinforcement Learning Post-Training

Authors: Yu HeYingxi LiYifei WangEllen Vitercik

Abstract

Compositional reasoning is critical for real-world problem solving: since training data is necessarily limited, models must generalize by composing learned skills in new ways. While post-training methods such as reinforcement learning (RL) have substantially improved the reasoning abilities of language models (LMs), their effects on compositional reasoning remain less well understood. We propose a dependency-graph framework to formalize compositional reasoning, yielding three levels of compositionality with increasing complexity. Empirically, we instantiate this framework with data-structure tasks, which provide deterministic reward computation and clear compositional structure. We find a consistent decomposed-to-composed asymmetry: decomposed-skill training does not reliably transfer to composed tasks, whereas composed-task training transfers more readily back to decomposed tasks. We provide theoretical explanation for this asymmetry, and further evaluate compositional generalization under length extrapolation, structural distribution shift, and transfer to tasks requiring unseen skills. Finally, we present a pilot study on real-world tool-calling benchmarks, showing preliminary evidence that the decomposed-to-composed asymmetry can extend to practical settings.

Explore similar work

Jun 16, 2026cs.LG

From Reasoning Traces to Reusable Modules: Understanding Compositional Generalization in Language Model Reasoning

Post-training pipelines that combine supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with reinforcement learning (RL) have emerged as the key recipe for transforming large language models (LLMs) into robust reasoners. We argue that this combined success is driven by compositional generalization, which we formalize through a hierarchical latent selection model. In this framework, reasoning traces are generated by a cascade of discrete latent selection variables corresponding to reusable atomic modules, including both skills (local operations) and routing mechanisms (how intermediate information is selected, reused, and composed). Within this model, we theoretically show that SFT and RL play asymmetric, complementary roles: SFT supplies the raw module materials in compositional traces, and RL decomposes those traces to identify the latent atomic modules and enable compositional generalization. We design controlled experiments to validate this theory. Our results demonstrate that RL can extract atomic modules from compound traces supplied by SFT and recombine them to solve new configurations. Moreover, we find that training on compound traces yields stronger generalization than training on isolated atomic modules. Finally, we investigate the relationship between SFT and RL data and identify an effective protocol in which SFT ensures coverage of all atomic modules through compositional traces, while RL focuses on novel compositions outside the SFT support to drive exploration.
Lingjing Kong, Xin Liu, Guangyi Chen +9
May 28, 2025cs.CL

Learning Composable Chains-of-Thought

A common approach for teaching large language models (LLMs) to reason is to train on chain-of-thought (CoT) traces of in-distribution reasoning problems, but such annotated data is costly to obtain for every problem of interest. We want reasoning models to generalize beyond their training distribution, and ideally to generalize compositionally: combine atomic reasoning skills to solve harder, unseen reasoning tasks. We take a step towards compositional generalization of reasoning skills when addressing a target compositional task that has no labeled CoT data. We find that simply training models on CoT data of atomic tasks leads to limited generalization, but minimally modifying CoT formats of constituent atomic tasks to be composable can lead to improvements. We can train "atomic CoT" models on the atomic tasks with Composable CoT data and combine them with multitask learning or model merging for better zero-shot performance on the target compositional task. Such a combined model can be further bootstrapped on a small amount of compositional data using rejection sampling fine-tuning (RFT). Results on string operations and natural language skill compositions show that training LLMs on Composable CoT outperforms multitask learning and continued fine-tuning baselines within a given training data budget.
Fangcong Yin, Zeyu Leo Liu, Liu Leqi +2
Jul 8, 2026cs.AI

RL Post-Training Builds Compositional Reasoning Strategies

Does RL post-training merely amplify primitive skills already latent in a base model, or can it compose primitive skills into new higher-level strategies? We study this question in a fully observable rewrite-grammar environment where the pretraining distribution is known and every generated rewrite can be audited. A Transformer is pretrained on primitive symbol-rewrite chains and post-trained on a Trace-based reasoning task with only a binary final-answer reward. RL solves held-out problems that remain rarely solved by the pretrained model even under much larger sampling budgets, while rejection fine-tuning improves early but plateaus. Trace analysis shows that RL reorganizes primitive competence through a phased compositional mechanism: it first strengthens primitive reductions, then discovers valid composed procedures. These include sequential compositions, which collapse ordered chains of primitive contractions, and parallel compositions, which combine independent primitive contractions in a single step. The composed procedures are not isolated samples; they are reused and consolidated into a stable repertoire. Comparing RL with rejection fine-tuning shows that the key difference is not exploration volume but selectivity: RFT produces many shortcut-like rewrites, much of them invalid, whereas RL concentrates exploration into valid reusable structure. Pretraining ablations show that the emergence of compositional strategies is gated not by primitive exposure alone, but by whether pretraining organizes primitive competence into reduction procedures that RL can later compress. The base model provides weak procedural ingredients; RL builds them into reliable higher-level strategies.
Azwar Abdulsalam, Nishil Patel, Andrew Saxe