# Signal Reshaping for GRPO in Weak-Feedback Agentic Code Repair

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.07276 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.07276/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 47 of its 63 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 May 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)
- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 47)

- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [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)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06770/) (2023)
- [DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14476/) (2025)
- [SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.15793/) (2024)
- [Concrete Problems in AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.06565/) (2016)
- [Search-R1: Training LLMs to Reason and Leverage Search Engines with Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09516/) (2025)
- [Understanding R1-Zero-Like Training: A Critical Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.20783/) (2025)
- [OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.16741/) (2024)
- [On-Policy Distillation of Language Models: Learning from Self-Generated Mistakes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13649/) (2023)
- [Math-Shepherd: Verify and Reinforce LLMs Step-by-step without Human Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08935/) (2023)
- [Kimi K2.5: Visual Agentic Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02276/) (2026)
- [Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06592/) (2024)
- [RAGEN: Understanding Self-Evolution in LLM Agents via Multi-Turn Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.20073/) (2025)
- [ToolRL: Reward is All Tool Learning Needs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13958/) (2025)
- [CodeRL: Mastering Code Generation through Pretrained Models and Deep Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.01780/) (2022)
- [SWE-RL: Advancing LLM Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning on Open Software Evolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18449/) (2025)
- [Defining and Characterizing Reward Hacking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.13085/) (2022)
- [GDPO: Group reward-Decoupled Normalization Policy Optimization for Multi-reward RL Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05242/) (2026)
- [Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.02605/) (2025)
- [Free Process Rewards without Process Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.01981/) (2024)
- [A Survey of On-Policy Distillation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.00626/) (2026)
- [SequenceR: Sequence-to-Sequence Learning for End-to-End Program Repair](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.01808/) (2018)
- [Revisiting On-Policy Distillation: Empirical Failure Modes and Simple Fixes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.25562/) (2026)
- [RLTF: Reinforcement Learning from Unit Test Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.04349/) (2023)
- [Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards: GRPO's Effective Loss, Dynamics, and Success Amplification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.06639/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Code-agent RL often receives weak feedback: rollout-time signals are reliable and executable, but capture only necessary or surface conditions for task success rather than the target semantic predicate. Using agentic compile-fix as the setting, we study signal reshaping for standard GRPO under such feedback. Our central claim is that GRPO's within-group comparison is meaningful only after three kinds of signals are reshaped: outcome rewards recover semantic ranking, process signals localize intra-trajectory credit, and rollouts from the same prompt remain execution-comparable. We operationalize these conditions with a minimal signal-reshaping construction that leaves GRPO's group-normalized advantage construction unchanged: compile-and-semantic layered rewards reshape trajectory ranking, step-level process scores outside group reward normalization reshape within-trajectory update strength, and failure-cause-aware rollout governance reshapes within-group comparability. Experiments show a clear end-to-end gain: full signal-reshaped GRPO improves strict compile-and-semantic accuracy from the base model's zero-shot 0.385 to 0.535. Controlled comparisons further explain the source of this gain: binary rewards remove the compile-only middle tier and degrade trajectory control; on top of layered rewards, process-score weighting further improves accuracy from 0.48 to 0.53 and reduces average evaluation steps from 23.50 to 17.02. As a boundary comparison, privileged-prompt token-level distillation mainly optimizes local distributional alignment; in long tool-use trajectories, this signal is diluted by non-critical tokens and cannot replace outcome semantics, process credit, or within-group comparability.