Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) derives its learning signal from binary rewards via on-policy exploration and becomes a powerful paradigm for improving the reasoning of large language models. Yet it faces a learning cliff on problems beyond model's current ability: when every rollout fails, the samples reveal nothing about a correct solution, and group-relative estimators (e.g., GRPO, RLOO) collapse the update to zero advantage. Expert trajectories offer a remedy, but they are incompatible with the current policy and often lie in the student's low-probability regions, so the surviving updates demand large parameter shifts and decay into surface-level imitation rather than transferable reasoning. We argue that a useful learning signal on hard problems must be both verifiably correct and sufficiently compatible with the current policy. We propose Policy-Compatible Reinforcement Learning (PICO), which performs distribution-constrained joint decoding: expert data guides decoding at the token level while preserving the student's relative token probabilities, and a dynamic top-k mechanism confines the sampling distribution under a finite divergence budget, yielding trajectories that are verified and policy-compatible by construction. These trajectories are optimized jointly with on-policy rollouts under a mixed-behavior objective that mitigates their distribution mismatch via importance sampling. Experiments across reasoning diverse datasets and agentic benchmarks demonstrate that PICO consistently outperforms standard RLVR and prior off-policy baselines.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of PICO . Given an all-incorrect rollout group sampled from the student policy, PICO generates a verified joint trajectory to replace one failed rollout for mixed-behavior policy optimization. The joint trajectory is generated token by token through distribution-constrained joint decoding, which intersects the teacher and student top- k candidate sets.
Figure 2: Training dynamics of Qwen3-4B-Base and Qwen3-8B-Base. We report the training reward, solve-none question number, and average response length throughout training.
Method
In-domain (%)
Out-of-domain (%)
Avg.
AIME25
AIME26
HMMT26
MATH500
GPQA-D
HLE
Qwen3-4B-Base
Base
6.9
8.1
3.6
67.8
23.5
3.0
18.8
GRPO
21.7
14.4
10.0
84.6
34.3
2.2
27.9
LUFFY
22.1
18.1
14.0
84.2
36.6
3.8
29.8
Prefix-RFT
15.4
12.1
7.9
79.8
34.3
3.4
25.5
Table 1: Overall performance on in-domain and out-of-domain benchmarks, reported as avg@16. Bold and underlined values indicate the best and second-best results, respectively. △ denotes the absolute performance gain of our method over GRPO. Pass@ k results are reported in Table 4 .
Method
ALFWorld (%)
ScienceWorld (%)
Avg.
Seen
Unseen
Qwen3-4B-Instruct
GRPO
80.7
71.6
50.3
67.5
LUFFY
81.4
74.6
52.1
69.4
Prefix-RFT
82.1
72.4
52.9
69.1
PICO
88.6
79.1
55.3
74.3
Table 2: Performance on agentic reasoning benchmarks based on Qwen3-4B-Instruct. Bold and underlined values indicate the best and second-best results, respectively. △ denotes the absolute performance gains, in percentage points, of our method over GRPO.
Method / Variant
AIME25
AIME26
HMMT26
MATH500
Avg.
Qwen3-4B-Base
GRPO
21.7
14.4
10.0
84.6
32.7
PICO
23.1
22.3
15.9
87.6
37.2
w/o Joint Decoding
20.6
16.9
14.1
83.6
33.8
w/o Dynamic Top- k
Fixed k=5
23.3
16.9
12.7
84.2
34.3
Table 3: Ablation study of PICO on four mathematical reasoning benchmarks using Qwen3-4B-Base. “w/o Joint Decoding” directly generates responses from the teacher policy. The fixed- k variants replace the dynamic top- k mechanism with a fixed teacher candidate-set size. “w/o IS Ratio” removes the importance-sampling ratio from policy optimization. Bold and underlined values indicate the best and second-best results, respectively.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 3: Illustration of dynamic top- k joint decoding. At each decoding step, the student and teacher policies produce their respective top- k token sets, whose intersection defines the candidate set Ft(k) . The teacher-side value of k is progressively increased until the retained student probability mass Zt(k) reaches the prescribed threshold Zmin . The next token is then sampled from the student distribution restricted to the resulting candidate set.
Method
AIME25
AIME26
HMMT26
Avg.
Qwen3-4B-Base
Base
26.7
16.7
18.2
20.5
GRPO
33.3
40.0
30.3
34.5
LUFFY
40.0
40.0
27.3
35.8
Prefix-RFT
40.0
36.7
24.2
33.6
ReLIFT
40.0
23.3
24.2
29.2
Appendix
Table 4: Pass@16 performance on three mathematical reasoning benchmarks. Bold and underlined values indicate the best and second-best results, respectively. △ denotes the absolute performance gains, in percentage points, of our method over GRPO.
Figure 4: Dynamics of question rescue during training. The blue curves show the number of questions remaining unsolved through student self-sampling, while the orange curves show the number remaining unsolved after distribution-constrained joint decoding. The shaded regions represent questions successfully rescued by joint decoding. Results are reported for Qwen3-4B-Base and Qwen3-8B-Base on mathematical reasoning tasks, and Qwen3-4B-Instruct on ALFWorld.
Figure 5: Evolution of the normalization term Zt and the corresponding KL divergence, KL=−logZt , during training with Qwen3-4B-Base. The light blue curve shows the raw measurements, while the dark blue curve shows the smoothed trend.
Hyperparameter
Value
Common (shared by all methods)
Optimizer
AdamW
Learning rate
1e-6
Global training batch size
128
PPO mini-batch size
64
Rollout group size
8
Appendix
Table 5: Implementation and hyperparameter configuration for mathematical reasoning experiments.
Hyperparameter
Value
Common optimization configuration
Optimizer
AdamW
Learning rate
1e-6
Global training batch size
16
PPO mini-batch size
16
Rollout group size
8
Appendix
Table 6: Implementation and hyperparameter configuration for agentic experiments.
Method
Time/step (min)
Rollout Utilization (%)
Utilization/time
GRPO
28.3
57.2
2.01
PICO
43.6
91.9
2.11
Appendix
Table 7: Comparison of training efficiency for Qwen3-4B-Base on DAPO-Math-17K. All experiments use Qwen3-4B-Base and four NVIDIA H20 GPUs. Time per step is averaged over all policy-update steps. Rollout utilization is the percentage of sampled rollout groups with non-zero group-relative advantages. Utilization/time is calculated as rollout utilization divided by average time per step and is reported in percentage points per minute (higher is better).
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) enhances Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning but is suffer from advantage collapse: when all rollouts of a query receive identical rewards, the group variance vanishes, most damagingly on hard samples, where scaling rollout budgets yields little. We introduce Joint Policy and Prompt Optimization (P O) to mitigate this collapse by alternating continuous policy updates with discrete prompt evolution. P O mines hard samples with a success-rate threshold, evolves reasoning prompts for them with GEPA, and internalizes the elicited trajectories via context distillation, which optimizes each trajectory under the original query and thus removes inference-time prompting, with a Context Ratio Mask (CRM) filtering out extreme likelihood ratios. P O restores critical advantage signals and surpasses the GRPO baseline by up to 8.2 points in average accuracy on six held-out benchmarks across all training datasets and backbones, while also outperforming DAPO and other baselines. The gains are especially pronounced on hard benchmarks, reaching up to 16.3 points above GRPO on average across AIME24 and AIME25. Our findings expose the limits of standard exploration in sparse-reward environments, illuminating the potential of unifying evolutionary algorithms with reinforcement learning. This integration of discrete semantic search and continuous parameter updates provides a self-reinforcing framework that facilitates more effective LLM alignment.
Xinyu Lu, Kaiqi Zhang, Jinglin Yang +6
Chinese Information Processing Laboratory, Institute of Software, Chinese Academy of Sciences · University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · Institute of Information Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences +2
Recent methods for Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) use rollout diversity to improve reasoning performance or training efficiency. Despite these gains, the extent to which differences among correct-answer rollouts reflect useful alternative reasoning or unresolved errors remains poorly understood. We investigate this question through a blind paired analysis of a model trained with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), comparing the highest- and lowest-agreement correct-answer traces for the same problem. Across 126 pairs, low-agreement traces have more spurious reasoning than high-agreement traces (35% vs. 22%), including internal inconsistencies and misuse of problem conditions. Based on these findings, we propose RoAR (Rollout-Agreement Reward), which adds reasoning-level agreement to GRPO's rewards for verified-correct rollouts. RoAR computes this signal from existing on-policy rollout groups, requiring no human-written rationales, additional sampling, or separately trained process evaluator. On five mathematical reasoning benchmarks, the 1.5B GRPO-RoAR model reaches 55.5% mean pass@1 under zero-shot evaluation using 7K training examples, exceeding GRPO and GRPO-CARE by 6.0 and 5.5 percentage points. A separate blind audit of 100 problems answered correctly by all four 1.5B models finds spurious rates of 18% for GRPO-RoAR, 32% for GRPO, 27% for GRPO-CARE, and 37% for DRA-GRPO. Our findings identify reasoning validity as an important consideration when using rollout differences to guide learning. Our code is available at https://github.com/ldi-kyunghee/RoAR.
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has significantly advanced the reasoning capacity of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, RLVR solely relies on final answers as outcome rewards, neglecting the correctness of intermediate reasoning steps. Training on these process-wrong but outcome-correct rollouts can lead to hallucination and answer-copying, severely undermining the model's generalization and robustness. To address this, we incorporate a Contrastive Learning mechanism into the Policy Optimization (CLIPO) to generalize the RLVR process. By optimizing a contrastive loss over successful rollouts, CLIPO steers the LLM to capture the invariant structure shared across correct reasoning paths. This provides a more robust cross-trajectory regularization than the original single-path supervision in RLVR, effectively mitigating step-level reasoning inconsistencies and suppressing hallucinatory artifacts. In experiments, CLIPO consistently improves multiple RLVR baselines across diverse reasoning benchmarks, demonstrating uniform improvements in generalization and robustness for policy optimization of LLMs. Our code and training recipes are available at https://github.com/Qwen-Applications/CLIPO.
Sijia Cui, Pengyu Cheng, Jiajun Song +6
Qwen Large Model Application Team, Alibaba · Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences