mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Transformers with RL or SFT Provably Learn Sparse Boolean Functions, But Differently

arXiv 2511.17852 ↗First posted 22 Nov 2025cs.LG stat.MLcited by 1

On the map: LLM reasoning → Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Transformers can acquire Chain-of-Thought (CoT) capabilities to solve reasoning tasks via fine-tuning. Reinforcement learning (RL) and supervised fine-tuning (SFT) are two primary approaches to this end. In this work, we examine RL with verifiable process rewards and SFT for learning k-sparse Boolean functions with a one-layer transformer through intermediate reasoning steps akin to CoT. In particular, we consider Boolean functions that can be recursively decomposed into fixed 2-sparse Boolean functions. We first analyze the learning dynamics of RL fine-tuning with verifiable process rewards and SFT in a unified way, allowing us to identify sufficient conditions under which the transformer provably learns these functions. We then verify that the conditions hold for three examples, including k-PARITY, k-AND, and k-OR, thus demonstrating their learnability via both RL and SFT. Notably, we reveal that RL and SFT exhibit distinct learning behaviors depending on supervision: RL learns the whole CoT chain simultaneously, whereas SFT without teacher forcing learns the CoT step-by-step. Overall, our findings provide insights on the mechanisms underlying RL and SFT and how they differ in triggering the CoT capabilities of transformers, and suggest that the comparison between RL and SFT should consider the intermediate supervision.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 29 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Nov 2025.

Builds on

29 of 38 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Lower Bounds for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Hard-Attention Transformers4 Feb
  2. 2024Transformers Provably Solve Parity Efficiently with Chain of Thought11 Oct
  3. 2024Unveiling the Statistical Foundations of Chain-of-Thought Prompting Methods25 Aug
  4. 2024Chain of Thought Empowers Transformers to Solve Inherently Serial Problems20 Feb
  5. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models28 Jan

Other references · 24

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  3. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  4. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  5. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  6. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
  7. 2016Asynchronous Methods for Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 2,218
  8. 2022STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With Reasoningcited by 895
  9. 2022Transformers learn in-context by gradient descentcited by 714
  10. 2025SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes: A Comparative Study of Foundation Model Post-trainingcited by 655
  11. 2024Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learningcited by 405
  12. 2023Trained Transformers Learn Linear Models In-Contextcited by 331
12 more
  1. 2017Failures of Gradient-Based Deep Learningcited by 79
  2. 2024Why are Sensitive Functions Hard for Transformers?cited by 74
  3. 2024Training Dynamics of Multi-Head Softmax Attention for In-Context Learning: Emergence, Convergence, and Optimalitycited by 71
  4. 2022Simplicity Bias in Transformers and their Ability to Learn Sparse Boolean Functionscited by 68
  5. 2024Theoretical limitations of multi-layer Transformercited by 43
  6. 2022Sub-Task Decomposition Enables Learning in Sequence to Sequence Taskscited by 41
  7. 2025Learning Compositional Functions with Transformers from Easy-to-Hard Datacited by 34
  8. 2016Distribution-Specific Hardness of Learning Neural Networkscited by 27
  9. 2024Transformers Learn Low Sensitivity Functions: Investigations and Implicationscited by 13
  10. 2025How Transformers Learn Regular Language Recognition: A Theoretical Study on Training Dynamics and Implicit Biascited by 10
  11. 2025Multi-head Transformers Provably Learn Symbolic Multi-step Reasoning via Gradient Descentcited by 7
  12. 2025Minimalist Softmax Attention Provably Learns Constrained Boolean Functionscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Transformers Provably Learn Chain-of-Thought Reasoning with Length Generalization
  2. 2026Transformers Provably Learn to Internalize Chain-of-Thought
  3. 2026SARL: Label-Free Reinforcement Learning by Rewarding Reasoning Topology
  4. 2026VERIFY-RL: Verifiable Recursive Decomposition for Reinforcement Learning in Mathematical Reasoning
  5. 2026Sequential Beats Joint: On the Interplay between On-Policy Distillation and RLVR
  6. 2025The Kinetics of Reasoning: How Chain-of-Thought Shapes Learning in Transformers?
  7. 2025AceReason-Nemotron 1.1: Advancing Math and Code Reasoning through SFT and RL Synergy
  8. 2026Rethinking RL for LLM Reasoning: It's Sparse Policy Selection, Not Capability Learning