Long rollout windows make reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) expensive, yet simply shortening them can remove the correctness signal: when every single-problem rollout truncates before an answer, group-relative accuracy advantages vanish. As a technical continuation of Batched Contextual Reinforcement (BCR), we study how concurrent rewards relax this dependence on long windows. Concurrent Constraint Reinforcement (CCR) places three independently verifiable problems in one capped training completion. Correct answers completed before truncation retain credit, while a shared budget encourages shorter useful reasoning without an explicit length penalty. We connect this mechanism to conditional reward- and update-variance analyses and study 4B and 8B mathematical reasoning models. Against single-problem GRPO with a 32k window, CCR with an 8,000-token window reduces tokens per training step from 975,464 to 174,957 on 4B and from 793,832 to 165,788 on 8B, saving 82.1% and 79.1%, respectively. An 8B training trace shows increasing accuracy reward alongside shorter completions. Single-problem evaluations provide supporting evidence of retained reasoning quality. These results identify reward-preserving training structure as a practical route to lower per-step cost in short-window RLVR.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Standard GRPO versus CCR. Top: each candidate solves one problem with a long window and receives a terminal correctness reward. Bottom: each CCR candidate attempts grouped problems sequentially under a shorter shared cap. Correct completed answers retain credit despite suffix truncation; correctness is averaged over all assigned problems for the update. Checks, crosses, and slashes denote correct answers, incorrect answers, and truncation. Shorter ribbons illustrate training-token efficiency, not measured ratios. Reward averaging motivates the conditional stability analysis in Section 4 .
Candidate
Correct prefix
racc
aj
y1
0 answers
0
−1/3
y2
1 answer
1/3
0
y3
2 answers
2/3
+1/3
y4
1 answer
1/3
0
Table 1: Illustrative N=3 , S=4 group. All candidates truncate before completing the group. Their mean accuracy reward is 1/3 ; completed prefix answers preserve relative feedback.
Figure 2: CCR reduces tokens per training step by 82.1% on 4B and 79.1% on 8B. Filled berry markers denote CCR with three problems and an 8,000-token shared window; hollow clay markers denote single-problem GRPO with a 32k window. The common linear axis shows the absolute per-step counters. Both comparisons use eight A100 GPUs and matched remaining training parameters.
Figure 3: Accuracy improves as training completions shorten. The 8B CCR run uses N=3 and an 8,000-token shared cap. Faint traces show raw observations over steps 1–1,000; solid traces show trailing 50-step means of accuracy reward and joint-completion length.
Qwen3-4B-Thinking
Qwen3-8B-ODA-Math
Accuracy (%)
Eval. tokens
Accuracy (%)
Eval. tokens
Benchmark
Base
CCR
Base
CCR
Base
CCR
Base
CCR
AIME24
83.3
83.3
18,082
14,539
63.3
70.0
16,549
13,680
AIME25
70.0
83.3
20,773
17,498
66.7
60.0
17,832
13,693
AMC23
97.5
100.0
10,457
7,128
95.0
97.5
6,988
4,516
MATH-500
97.0
97.4
5,136
3,173
95.4
94.4
4,010
2,773
Table 2: Reasoning quality after short-window training. CCR is trained with N=3 and evaluated on single-problem prompts. Accuracy is final-answer correctness (%); tokens are evaluation lengths. Base denotes the starting checkpoint.
Reinforcement learning studies how agents learn sequential decisions from rewards and interaction, balancing exploration, performance, safety, and adaptation.
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has significantly advanced the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) by optimizing them against factual outcomes. However, this paradigm falters in long-context scenarios, as its reliance on internal parametric knowledge is ill-suited for tasks requiring contextual grounding--the ability to find and reason over externally provided information. We identify a key reason for this failure: a reward based solely on the final answer is too sparse to effectively guide the model for identifying relevant evidence. We formally prove that the outcome-only reward leads to significant vanishing gradients for the context grounding process, rendering learning intractable. To overcome this bottleneck, we introduce LongRLVR to augment the sparse answer reward with a dense and verifiable context reward. This auxiliary signal directly incentivizes the model for selecting the correct grounding information, providing a robust learning gradient that solves the underlying optimization challenge. We validate our method on challenging long-context benchmarks using Qwen and LLaMA models. LongRLVR consistently and significantly outperforms the standard RLVR across all models and benchmarks, e.g., boosting a 14B model's scores on RULER-QA from 73.17 to 88.90 and on LongBench v2 from 39.8 to 46.5. Our work demonstrates that explicitly rewarding the grounding process is a critical and effective strategy for unlocking the full reasoning potential of LLMs in long-context applications. Our code is available at https://github.com/real-absolute-AI/LongRLVR.
Guanzheng Chen, Michael Qizhe Shieh, Lidong Bing
National University of Singapore · MiroMind AI · absolute AI
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) implemented with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) has driven substantial progress in training reasoning language models. However, verifiable outcome rewards provide an imperfect measure of reasoning quality: a correct final answer may not be supported by the reasoning trace, whereas an incorrect rollout may contain a nearly correct reasoning trajectory. We present empirical evidence for this mismatch and hypothesize that the resulting reward noise contributes to instability in reinforcement learning for both reasoning accuracy and token efficiency. To address this credit assignment challenge, this paper proposes double-rollout reinforcement learning. For each sampled rollout, we truncate its reasoning trace, sample multiple continuations from the truncated prefix, and replace the original reward with the mean continuation reward, yielding a more robust estimate of reasoning quality. This double-rollout algorithm incurs only a moderate increase in compute cost and yet reaches substantially higher accuracies across math and coding tasks and across Qwen and Nemotron models than baseline algorithms with fewer RL steps. For example, using only DAPO data it trains Nemotron-3-Nano-30B-A3B to reach 95.4% on AIME 2026, versus 91.5% by GRPO and substantially above state of the art for this model size, within 30 RL steps. When combined with length-based rewards, the same algorithm further improves the accuracy-efficiency Pareto frontier over existing efficiency optimizations. These findings suggest that the double-rollout reward estimation is an effective and cost-efficient way to improve both the accuracy and token efficiency of reasoning RL.
Haifeng Qian, David Mosallanezhad, Christian Munley +2
NVIDIA, 2788 San Tomas Expressway, Santa Clara, CA 95051, USA
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) trains language models from checked task outcomes, but assigning a terminal reward to individual reasoning tokens or actions remains difficult. Group-relative methods such as Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) sample several attempts per prompt, but lose their reward-based learning signal when all attempts receive the same outcome. We propose Hindsight-Privileged RLVR (HP-RLVR), a single-rollout method that turns a completed trajectory's own future into token-level update weights. The generating policy snapshot scores each eligible token under its causal history and under a hindsight context containing the realized future and verifier feedback. A normalized Jensen--Shannon divergence between the two views weights the reward relative to a historical baseline, yielding bounded token credit for both successful and failed attempts, with no reference solution or learned critic. In paired Qwen3-8B runs over a shared 100-step schedule, HP-RLVR trains 1.21×, 1.46×, and 2.30× faster than GRPO on mathematics, code generation, and ALFWorld, using one eighth the rollouts per prompt. Accuracy is comparable overall, with HP-RLVR ahead on mathematics at all three sizes and GRPO ahead on code and ALFWorld. In ALFWorld, 43.2% (4B) and 49.0% (8B) of GRPO's gradient-norm records are zero, versus none for HP-RLVR.
Wei Chen, Yubing Wu, Zhou Xu +9
South China University of Technology · Tsinghua University · The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology +3