mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Decouple before Integration: Test-time Synthesis of SFT and RLVR Task Vectors

arXiv 2605.00610 ↗First posted 1 May 2026cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

SFT and RLVR represent two fundamental yet distinct paradigms for LLM post-training, each excelling in distinct dimensions. SFT expands knowledge breadth while RLVR enhances reasoning depth. Yet integrating these complementary strengths remains a formidable challenge. Sequential training can cause catastrophic forgetting, and joint optimization often suffers from severe gradient conflicts. We analyze SFT and RLVR through the lens of task vectors and reveal three structural properties behind these failures: a 30* magnitude disparity, 45* sign interference, and heterogeneous module-wise update distributions. These findings show SFT and RLVR are difficult to integrate directly, but they also suggest that the two paradigms modify partly complementary components of the model. Motivated by these observations, we propose Decoupled Test-time Synthesis (DoTS), a post-hoc framework allows SFT and RLVR checkpoints to be trained independently and synthesizes their capabilities only at inference time via task vector arithmetic, without updating model parameters. To reduce interference, DOTS applies selective sparsification with norm-preserving rescaling. It then uses Bayesian optimization on a small set of unlabeled queries to search for combination coefficients on the Pareto frontier of consistency and perplexity. Empirically, ours matches or exceeds the performance of training-based SFT--RLVR integration methods across multiple mathematical reasoning benchmarks, incurring only ~3% of the computational cost. When applied to stronger post-trained checkpoints, DOTS surpasses SOTA models and generalizes to out-of-domain benchmarks without re-tuning. Code is available at https://github.com/chaohaoyuan/DoTS.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 May 2026.

Builds on

39 of 45 references.

References · 39

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  3. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  4. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  5. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
  6. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,767
  7. 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
  8. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
  9. 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,455
  10. 2024LlamaFactory: Unified Efficient Fine-Tuning of 100+ Language Modelscited by 1,442
  11. 2025Understanding R1-Zero-Like Training: A Critical Perspectivecited by 1,276
  12. 2024OlympiadBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Promoting AGI with Olympiad-Level Bilingual Multimodal Scientific Problemscited by 1,099
27 more
  1. 2022Editing Models with Task Arithmeticcited by 1,076
  2. 2024Qwen2.5-Math Technical Report: Toward Mathematical Expert Model via Self-Improvementcited by 1,057
  3. 2023TIES-Merging: Resolving Interference When Merging Modelscited by 795
  4. 2023Language Models are Super Mario: Absorbing Abilities from Homologous Models as a Free Lunchcited by 679
  5. 2025SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes: A Comparative Study of Foundation Model Post-trainingcited by 655
  6. 2025SimpleRL-Zoo: Investigating and Taming Zero Reinforcement Learning for Open Base Models in the Wildcited by 505
  7. 2025Process Reinforcement through Implicit Rewardscited by 478
  8. 2025Open-Reasoner-Zero: An Open Source Approach to Scaling Up Reinforcement Learning on the Base Modelcited by 450
  9. 2025Learning to Reason under Off-Policy Guidancecited by 266
  10. 2023AdaMerging: Adaptive Model Merging for Multi-Task Learningcited by 248
  11. 2024When Scaling Meets LLM Finetuning: The Effect of Data, Model and Finetuning Methodcited by 201
  12. 2023Mitigating the Alignment Tax of RLHFcited by 181
  13. 2025Light-R1: Curriculum SFT, DPO and RL for Long COT from Scratch and Beyondcited by 175
  14. 2024WARM: On the Benefits of Weight Averaged Reward Modelscited by 145
  15. 2024Physics of Language Models: Part 3.3, Knowledge Capacity Scaling Lawscited by 137
  16. 2025On the Generalization of SFT: A Reinforcement Learning Perspective with Reward Rectificationcited by 121
  17. 2025Learning What Reinforcement Learning Can't: Interleaved Online Fine-Tuning for Hardest Questionscited by 95
  18. 2025SRFT: A Single-Stage Method with Supervised and Reinforcement Fine-Tuning for Reasoningcited by 80
  19. 2025Whoever Started the Interference Should End It: Guiding Data-Free Model Merging via Task Vectorscited by 59
  20. 2025BREAD: Branched Rollouts from Expert Anchors Bridge SFT & RL for Reasoningcited by 57
  21. 2025The Path Not Taken: RLVR Provably Learns Off the Principalscited by 52
  22. 2024WARP: On the Benefits of Weight Averaged Rewarded Policiescited by 42
  23. 2025When is Task Vector Provably Effective for Model Editing? A Generalization Analysis of Nonlinear Transformerscited by 38
  24. 2025NFT: Bridging Supervised Learning and Reinforcement Learning in Math Reasoningcited by 38
  25. 2025Supervised Fine Tuning on Curated Data is Reinforcement Learning (and can be improved)cited by 37
  26. 2025RL Squeezes, SFT Expands: A Comparative Study of Reasoning LLMscited by 32
  27. 2025Scalpel vs. Hammer: GRPO Amplifies Existing Capabilities, SFT Replaces Themcited by 14

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. 2026Sparsity Curse: Understanding RLVR Model Parameter Space from Model Merging
  2. 2026On the Direction of RLVR Updates for LLM Reasoning: Identification and Exploitation
  3. 2025Beyond Two-Stage Training: Cooperative SFT and RL for LLM Reasoning
  4. 2026How Fast Should a Model Commit to Supervision? Training Reasoning Models on the Tsallis Loss Continuum
  5. 2025Quagmires in SFT-RL Post-Training: When High SFT Scores Mislead and What to Use Instead
  6. 2025The Synergy Dilemma of Long-CoT SFT and RL: Investigating Post-Training Techniques for Reasoning VLMs
  7. 2026Beyond Normalization: Rethinking the Partition Function as a Difficulty Scheduler for RLVR
  8. 2026SFT-then-RL Outperforms Mixed-Policy Methods for LLM Reasoning