VPO: Reasoning Preferences Optimization Based on V-Usable Information

Generalizing Preference-based Reinforcement Learning: a Rationality Model for Incomparability

In this work, we study the reinforcement learning (RL) problem from pairwise trajectory comparisons provided by a human expert. We generalize preference-based RL by formalizing a novel setting in which the expert can also label trajectory pairs as incomparable, i.e., when neither trajectory dominates the other. We introduce the learning problem and the desiderata that its solution should satisfy. Then, we propose a novel Bradley-Terry-inspired rationality model that effectively captures incomparabilities and infers a multi-dimensional reward function, and we study its properties. We provide a sample complexity analysis for learning the model parameters when a dataset is available. Finally, we evaluate our model's ability to reconstruct a reward function that aligns with the expert's comparisons in simulated environments and to recover the Pareto frontier of policies, along with a robustness analysis across varying levels of expert rationality.

BODHI: Do LLMs Branch Out and Discover Heterogeneous Inferences?

Although reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has improved the performance of large language models (LLMs) across a variety of reasoning tasks, there is significant debate as to whether RLVR expands the reasoning capability boundary, or just improves sampling efficiency. In this paper, we investigate the nature of test-time exploration in RLVR-trained LLMs by employing controlled maze-solving experiments and extracting a tree structure from mathematical reasoning traces (BODHI-Trees) based on semantic equivalence. This helps us delineate between entropy arising from stylistic variations and genuine inferential branching. Our findings demonstrate that the policy entropy collapse observed in RLVR models is not merely syntactic, and is accompanied by a significant reduction in semantic branching entropy. While RLVR improves adherence to environmental constraints and backtracking capabilities, it constricts the space of continuations; we provide evidence suggesting that this might be responsible for the sample efficiency gains of RLVR, albeit at the cost of genuine rollout diversity.

Let VLMs Grade Their Own Thoughts: A Self-Quantification Approach to Reasoning-Aware Reward Modeling

Rewarding Better Thinking for LLM Preference Alignment

LLM preference alignment aims to optimize models toward human preferences across diverse user instructions. Reinforcement learning has become a major post-training approach for this goal, but existing proxy rewards are often outcome-level, mainly evaluating the final response while providing limited guidance for the reasoning trajectory. This can make credit assignment coarse when multiple responses receive similar final scores, leaving trajectory-level preferences under-specified. To address this limitation, we propose Thinking Checklist Reward (TCR), a process-oriented reward for RL-based preference alignment. TCR converts preference pairs into sample-specific thinking checklists and uses them to evaluate whether the generated reasoning trace addresses the preference-implied considerations. To reduce overlap with outcome-level supervision, TCR further introduces an exponential moving average (EMA) residual formulation to isolate a complementary thinking surplus beyond what is predictable from the outcome reward. Experiments on five models from three model families show that TCR consistently improves alignment performance across diverse benchmarks, with ablations further validating the importance of EMA-based residual formulation and sample-specific checklist supervision.

Measuring Reward-Seeking via Contrastive Belief Updates

Language models trained with reinforcement learning may learn to optimize the grader's judgment rather than the intended objective. This"reward-seeking"is difficult to measure because a model that pursues the grader's judgment and one that pursues the intended objective behave identically whenever the grader rewards the intended behavior. We measure reward-seeking using Contrastive Synthetic Document Finetuning to change a model's beliefs about what the grader rewards, putting those beliefs in conflict with what users or developers want, and measuring the rate at which the model adopts each party's preferred behavior. Applied to intermediate checkpoints of a capabilities-focused OpenAI o3 RL run, without safety training, we find that these checkpoints often side with grader preferences over those of users or developers on coding and alignment tasks. This tendency to side with the grader trends upward throughout RL training. For example, in an environment that forces a choice between keeping a promise to a supervisor and breaking it to complete the task, a late capabilities-focused o3 checkpoint breaks the promise 87% of the time when SDF documents say the grader rewards task completion, versus 9% when they say it rewards honesty (a choice its chain-of-thought often makes explicit). An earlier checkpoint is far less sensitive (40% vs. 24%). Our method also generalizes to reward-hacking models. A model organism trained to reward-hack (gpt-oss-120b) is more than twice as sensitive to grader preferences as the unmodified model, with the mean behavioral shift in favor of the grader rising from 33% to 86%. These results indicate that RL can increase reward-seeking over the course of training, producing models that may act against their developers'intentions when they believe that doing so leads to higher reward.

SP3O: Reinforcement Learning from Segment Preferences without Reward Modeling

Preference-based reinforcement learning (PbRL) for general stochastic MDPs often requires training a reward model. Existing reward-model-free methods are either restricted to bandits or deterministic MDPs, such as DPO or P3O, or use zeroth-order, gradient-free optimization, which in general exhibits a slower convergence rate than gradient-based algorithms. Furthermore, existing reward-model-free preference-based RL algorithms almost exclusively use trajectory-level feedback, which can require significant effort from a human evaluator when trajectories are long. On the other hand, segments are much shorter, so they are easier to compare and evaluate. In this paper, we introduce a novel reward-model-free, critic-free, and gradient-based PbRL algorithm compatible with segment preferences named Segment Pairwise Proximal Policy Optimization (SP3O). SP3O utilizes segment-level preference feedback to construct an accurate policy value difference estimator via off-policy importance sampling, and then uses the estimator to compute the policy gradient via a PPO-type loss function. We provide a theoretical basis for the algorithm and analyze the tradeoff in choosing the segment length. We also evaluate it experimentally against other PbRL/RLHF algorithms in robotic control and LLM finetuning settings to show its improved performance, especially in long-horizon tasks.