# RRO: LLM Agent Optimization Through Rising Reward Trajectories

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.20737 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.20737/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reinforcement learning for reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 22 of its 23 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 May 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reinforcement learning for reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reinforcement-learning-for-reasoning/)
- LLM agents and tool use / [Reinforcement learning for LLM agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/reinforcement-learning-for-llm-agents/)
- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [Process reward models for reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/process-reward-models-for-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 22 of 22)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03741/) (2017)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10625/) (2022)
- [WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.01206/) (2022)
- [Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12588/) (2022)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06592/) (2024)
- [Complexity-Based Prompting for Multi-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.00720/) (2022)
- [FireAct: Toward Language Agent Fine-tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.05915/) (2023)
- [InterCode: Standardizing and Benchmarking Interactive Coding with Execution Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.14898/) (2023)
- [Trial and Error: Exploration-Based Trajectory Optimization for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02502/) (2024)
- [Debug like a Human: A Large Language Model Debugger via Verifying Runtime Execution Step-by-step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.16906/) (2024)
- [Watch Every Step! LLM Agent Learning via Iterative Step-Level Process Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11176/) (2024)
- [Multi-step Problem Solving Through a Verifier: An Empirical Analysis on Model-induced Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.02658/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [ARCO: Adaptive Rubrics with Co-Evolution for Multi-Step LLM-Based Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.21262/) (2026)
- [Supervised Fine-Tuning versus Reinforcement Learning: A Study of Post-Training Methods for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.13985/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited extraordinary performance in a variety of tasks while it remains challenging for them to solve complex multi-step tasks as agents. In practice, agents sensitive to the outcome of certain key steps which makes them likely to fail the task because of a subtle mistake in the planning trajectory. Recent approaches resort to calibrating the reasoning process through reinforcement learning. They reward or penalize every reasoning step with process supervision, as known as Process Reward Models (PRMs). However, PRMs are difficult and costly to scale up with a large number of next action candidates since they require extensive computations to acquire the training data through the per-step trajectory exploration. To mitigate this issue, we focus on the relative reward trend across successive reasoning steps and propose maintaining an increasing reward in the collected trajectories for process supervision, which we term Reward Rising Optimization (RRO). Specifically, we incrementally augment the process supervision until identifying a step exhibiting positive reward differentials, i.e. rising rewards, relative to its preceding iteration. This method dynamically expands the search space for the next action candidates, efficiently capturing high-quality data. We provide mathematical groundings and empirical results on the WebShop and InterCode-SQL benchmarks, showing that our proposed RRO achieves superior performance while requiring much less exploration cost.