Pass@k Metric for RLVR: A Diagnostic Tool of Exploration, But Not an Objective
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reinforcement learning for reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
The ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to perform complex, multi-step reasoning is a central focus of modern AI research. To evaluate and enhance this capability, the pass@k metric, which measures the probability of obtaining at least one correct solution in k independent samples, has received significant attention. Its intuitive appeal has led to its adoption not only as an evaluation standard but also as a direct optimization objective in reinforcement learning. In this paper, we analyze the pass@k objective, derive its gradient, and demonstrate that it is fundamentally a per-example positive reweighting of the simpler pass@1 objective. Our analysis reveals that the pass@k objective provides a vanishing learning signal in regimes where exploration is most critical. We further analyze the dynamics of "exploration collapse", showing that as the policy concentrates probability mass, the gap between pass@k and pass@1 diminishes. We conclude that while pass@k is a useful diagnostic tool, it may be an unsuitable direct objective for optimization. Instead, mechanisms explicitly encouraging efficient exploration could offer a more effective path forward for reinforcement learning in reasoning tasks.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reinforcement learning for reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 14 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2025.
Builds on
14 of 16 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Pass@k Training for Adaptively Balancing Exploration and Exploitation of Large Reasoning Models14 Aug
- 2025Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?18 Apr
Other references · 12
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
- 2019Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferencescited by 2,124
- 2022STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With Reasoningcited by 895
- 2025Pass@K Policy Optimization: Solving Harder Reinforcement Learning Problemscited by 83
- 2025Beyond the Sampled Token: Preserving Candidate Support in RLVRcited by 18
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 10.
11 papers.
- 2026InT: Self-Proposed Interventions Enable Credit Assignment in LLM Reasoningcited by 14
- 2026Understanding Diversity Collapse in RLVR via the Lens of Overtrainingcited by 9
- 2026Why Pass@k Optimization Can Degrade Pass@1: Prompt Interference in LLM Post-trainingcited by 6
- 2026ResRL: Boosting LLM Reasoning via Negative Sample Projection Residual Reinforcement Learningcited by 5
- 2026TopoCurate:Modeling Interaction Topology for Tool-Use Agent Trainingcited by 3
- 2026Distribution-Aware Reward Estimation for Test-Time Reinforcement Learningcited by 2
- 2025Beyond Token-level Supervision: Unlocking the Potential of Decoding-based Regression via Reinforcement Learningcited by 1
- 2026When RL Suppresses Its Own Vocabulary: Recovering Reasoning Diversity in Puzzle-to-Math Transfercited by 0
- 2026Annealed Softmax Greedy in Many-Armed Bayesian Banditscited by 0
- 2026Locked at the Entrance, Open Inside: Where RLVR Narrows the Solution Spacecited by 0
- 2026SERA: Scale-Equalized Rollout Allocation for Maximum Likelihood Reinforcement Learningcited by 0
- 2026SERA: Scale-Equalized Rollout Allocation for Maximum Likelihood Reinforcement Learning29 Sep 2026
- 2026Locked at the Entrance, Open Inside: Where RLVR Narrows the Solution Space29 Aug 2026
- 2026Understanding Diversity Collapse in RLVR via the Lens of Overtraining13 Jun 2026
- 2026Annealed Softmax Greedy in Many-Armed Bayesian Bandits29 May 2026
- 2026When RL Suppresses Its Own Vocabulary: Recovering Reasoning Diversity in Puzzle-to-Math Transfer28 May 2026
- 2026ResRL: Boosting LLM Reasoning via Negative Sample Projection Residual Reinforcement Learning1 May 2026
- 2026TopoCurate:Modeling Interaction Topology for Tool-Use Agent Training2 Mar 2026
- 2026Why Pass@k Optimization Can Degrade Pass@1: Prompt Interference in LLM Post-training24 Feb 2026
- 2026Distribution-Aware Reward Estimation for Test-Time Reinforcement Learning29 Jan 2026
- 2026InT: Self-Proposed Interventions Enable Credit Assignment in LLM Reasoning20 Jan 2026
- 2025Beyond Token-level Supervision: Unlocking the Potential of Decoding-based Regression via Reinforcement Learning6 Dec 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Beyond Pass@k: Breadth-Depth Metrics for Reasoning Boundaries
- 2025From Trial-and-Error to Improvement: A Systematic Analysis of LLM Exploration Mechanisms in RLVR
- 2026SAGE: Shaping Anchors for Guided Exploration in RLVR of LLMs
- 2025The Best of N Worlds: Aligning Reinforcement Learning with Best-of-N Sampling via max@k Optimisation
- 2026Boosting LLM Exploration via Weak-Model Guidance in RLVR
- 2026Decoupling Exploration from Optimization in RLVR
- 2025Unlocking Reasoning Capabilities in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning Exploration
- 2026When RLVR Shrinks the Reasoning Boundary: Diagnosing Pass@k Inversion