RSPO: Risk-Seeking Policy Optimization for Pass@k and Max@k Metrics in Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Current large language model post-training optimizes a risk-neutral objective that maximizes expected reward, yet evaluation relies heavily on risk-seeking metrics like Pass@k (at least one success in k trials) and Max@k (maximum reward across k responses). This mismatch in risk preferences can inevitably lead to suboptimal performance. To bridge this gap, we propose Risk-Seeking Policy Optimization (RSPO), a novel method that directly targets Pass@k and Max@k during training. A key challenge in optimizing these metrics is the "hitchhiking" problem: low-reward responses are inadvertently reinforced if they co-occur with a high-reward response within a sample of k generations, resulting in inefficient optimization. RSPO addresses this problem by leveraging the closed-form probability that a given response is the maximum among k samplings. Despite the complexity of nested gradients over multiple responses, RSPO produces efficient, unbiased gradient estimators for both metrics. We validate our approach with both rigorous theoretical analysis and comprehensive experimental results.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Aug 2025.
Builds on
15 of 34 references.
References · 15
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
- 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,588
- 2024HybridFlow: A Flexible and Efficient RLHF Frameworkcited by 2,057
- 2022Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Modelscited by 1,392
- 2025Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?cited by 982
- 2024Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 525
- 2024BoNBoN Alignment for Large Language Models and the Sweetness of Best-of-n Samplingcited by 121
- 2025Reasoning or Memorization? Unreliable Results of Reinforcement Learning Due to Data Contaminationcited by 82
3 more
- 2024Are Your LLMs Capable of Stable Reasoning?cited by 65
- 2025A Survey on Large Language Models for Mathematical Reasoningcited by 52
- 2024Learning from negative feedback, or positive feedback or bothcited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 4.
5 papers.
- 2025Beyond the Sampled Token: Preserving Candidate Support in RLVRcited by 18
- 2026Leveraging Error Diversity in Group Rollouts for Reinforcement Learningcited by 3
- 2026Boosting LLM Reasoning via Human-Inspired Reward Shapingcited by 1
- 2026Rank-Conditioned Sample Reuse for the Plackett--Luce Best-of-K Objectivecited by 0
- 2026GVPO++: Group Variance Policy Optimization for LLM Post-Training and On-Policy Distillationcited by 0
- 2026GVPO++: Group Variance Policy Optimization for LLM Post-Training and On-Policy Distillation18 Sep 2026
- 2026Rank-Conditioned Sample Reuse for the Plackett--Luce Best-of-K Objective13 Jul 2026
- 2026Leveraging Error Diversity in Group Rollouts for Reinforcement Learning17 May 2026
- 2026Boosting LLM Reasoning via Human-Inspired Reward Shaping4 Feb 2026
- 2025Beyond the Sampled Token: Preserving Candidate Support in RLVR16 Oct 2025