# Dependency-Aware Reward Shaping for Agentic Reinforcement Learning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01207 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.01207/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reinforcement learning for LLM agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 44 of its 56 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Oct 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Reinforcement learning for LLM agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/reinforcement-learning-for-llm-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 44)

- [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)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (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)
- [DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14476/) (2025)
- [Search-R1: Training LLMs to Reason and Leverage Search Engines with Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09516/) (2025)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.01206/) (2022)
- [ALFWorld: Aligning Text and Embodied Environments for Interactive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03768/) (2020)
- [Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15124/) (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)
- [Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.14275/) (2022)
- [Beyond the 80/20 Rule: High-Entropy Minority Tokens Drive Effective Reinforcement Learning for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.01939/) (2025)
- [Process Reinforcement through Implicit Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01456/) (2025)
- [Group-in-Group Policy Optimization for LLM Agent Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10978/) (2025)
- [ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06559/) (2024)
- [Rewarding Progress: Scaling Automated Process Verifiers for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.08146/) (2024)
- [Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.10934/) (2024)
- [ArCHer: Training Language Model Agents via Hierarchical Multi-Turn RL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.19446/) (2024)
- [The Landscape of Agentic Reinforcement Learning for LLMs: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.02547/) (2025)
- [Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00212/) (2025)
- [RUDDER: Return Decomposition for Delayed Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.07857/) (2018)
- [Agentic Reinforced Policy Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.19849/) (2025)
- [Free Process Rewards without Process Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.01981/) (2024)
- [The pitfalls of next-token prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.06963/) (2024)
- [Phi-4-reasoning Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.21318/) (2025)
- [Where LLM Agents Fail and How They can Learn From Failures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.25370/) (2025)
- [Hindsight Credit Assignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.02503/) (2019)

## Abstract (arXiv)

When training large language models with reinforcement learning, terminal rewards provide little guidance about which steps matter. Common methods for assigning step credit overlook that work built on uncorrected mistakes is wasted while independent work remains valid. With only a final success/failure reward, every step in a failed episode has zero total future reward, even when it made progress. We propose Dependency-Aware Reward Shaping (DARS), which represents task progress as predicates linked by prerequisite relations and assigns step-level credit over the dependency graph. An annotator marks which predicates each step verifies, invalidates, or repairs. Verified predicates are discounted according to graph distance from the nearest broken prerequisite, while independent predicates are unaffected. Repairs update these weights based on any errors that remain; invalidated predicates need re-verification to regain credit. A fixed potential converts these annotations into signed per-step rewards. A common reward and annotation interface allows DARS to integrate with a range of reasoning and agentic training methods, such as GiGPO and ARPO/AEPO, without changing their rollout strategies or optimizers. Across five task families and models from 1.5B to 8B, DARS improves success by up to 10 points over GiGPO trained with the same budget and harness (ALFWorld), raises the WebShop task score and Search-R1 QA accuracy, complements AEPO's entropy-based training on AIME24/25 with a Python interpreter, and exceeds OmniOPD in controlled tool-free reasoning comparisons at 1.7B and 4B. Ablations show that step-level credit, dependency attenuation, and graph topology each contribute. On ALFWorld, a distilled 8B annotator matches the API annotator, enabling DARS to run efficiently without a frontier judge. Code is available at https://github.com/JianhuiWei7/DARS.