mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

RL Post-Training Builds Compositional Reasoning Strategies

arXiv 2607.07646 ↗First posted 8 Jul 2026cs.AI cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Does RL post-training merely amplify primitive skills already latent in a base model, or can it compose primitive skills into new higher-level strategies? We study this question in a fully observable rewrite-grammar environment where the pretraining distribution is known and every generated rewrite can be audited. A Transformer is pretrained on primitive symbol-rewrite chains and post-trained on a Trace-based reasoning task with only a binary final-answer reward. RL solves held-out problems that remain rarely solved by the pretrained model even under much larger sampling budgets, while rejection fine-tuning improves early but plateaus. Trace analysis shows that RL reorganizes primitive competence through a phased compositional mechanism: it first strengthens primitive reductions, then discovers valid composed procedures. These include sequential compositions, which collapse ordered chains of primitive contractions, and parallel compositions, which combine independent primitive contractions in a single step. The composed procedures are not isolated samples; they are reused and consolidated into a stable repertoire. Comparing RL with rejection fine-tuning shows that the key difference is not exploration volume but selectivity: RFT produces many shortcut-like rewrites, much of them invalid, whereas RL concentrates exploration into valid reusable structure. Pretraining ablations show that the emergence of compositional strategies is gated not by primitive exposure alone, but by whether pretraining organizes primitive competence into reduction procedures that RL can later compress. The base model provides weak procedural ingredients; RL builds them into reliable higher-level strategies.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jul 2026.

Builds on

14 of 25 references.

References · 14

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  3. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
  4. 2025Understanding R1-Zero-Like Training: A Critical Perspectivecited by 1,276
  5. 2025Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?cited by 948
  6. 2022STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With Reasoningcited by 895
  7. 2022Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedbackcited by 871
  8. 2025SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes: A Comparative Study of Foundation Model Post-trainingcited by 655
  9. 2025Reasoning with Exploration: An Entropy Perspectivecited by 277
  10. 2025A Minimalist Approach to LLM Reasoning: from Rejection Sampling to Reinforcecited by 141
  11. 2025The Invisible Leash: Why RLVR May or May Not Escape Its Origincited by 92
  12. 2025Emergent Hierarchical Reasoning in LLMs through Reinforcement Learningcited by 42
2 more
  1. 2025From f(x) and g(x) to f(g(x)): LLMs Learn New Skills in RL by Composing Old Onescited by 40
  2. 2025Rethinking Sample Polarity in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewardscited by 19

Built on by

Not cited yet.