梳理大模型强化学习的三阶段设计,揭示研究盲区与新机会
Modularized Reinforcement Learning on LLMs: From MDP Creation to Exploration and Learning

- 按状态、动作、奖励等构建马尔可夫决策过程,系统化设计训练框架
- 发现当前方法集中于无价值函数的策略梯度和蒙特卡洛信用分配
- 指出模型基、离线策略、自举法等经典强化学习技术在大模型中几乎空白
强化学习已成为大模型后训练的核心,但当前主流方法如PPO和GRPO仅代表强化学习的一小部分。理解其主导地位及替代方案,需对算法设计决策进行系统分析。本文围绕三个阶段展开:首先定义用于大模型训练的马尔可夫决策过程,包括奖励函数、状态空间、动作空间、终止条件和折扣因子;其次探讨探索策略,涵盖温度采样、熵正则化、内在动机、树搜索与课程学习;最后从四个经典强化学习维度分析学习机制:无模型/有模型、基于值/基于策略/演员-评论家、在线/离线策略,以及信用分配(蒙特卡洛与自举法)。将大模型文献映射到该分类体系后发现,研究高度不均衡:无价值函数的策略梯度和蒙特卡洛信用分配密集,而基于值的方法、离线策略的演员-评论家训练以及自举法信用分配仍基本未被探索,尽管这些在经典强化学习中已有成熟应用。这些空白为迁移已验证的强化学习技术提供了明确方向。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Reinforcement learning (RL) has become central to LLM post-training, yet the methods that dominate current pipelines, PPO and GRPO, represent only a narrow slice of what RL offers. Understanding why these methods prevail, and what alternatives exist, requires a principled examination of the design decisions that underlie any RL algorithm. This survey organizes that examination around three stages of algorithm construction. We begin with MDP creation: how the reward function, state space, action space, termination condition, and discount factor are, or could be, defined for LLM training. We then turn to exploration, covering temperature sampling, entropy regularization, intrinsic motivation, tree search, and curriculum learning. Finally, we address learning along four classical RL dimensions: model-free versus model-based, value-based versus policy-based versus actor-critic, on-policy versus off-policy, and credit assignment, including both Monte Carlo methods, which rely on full return estimates, and bootstrapping methods, which update estimates using other learned predictions. Mapping the LLM literature onto this taxonomy reveals a strikingly non-uniform distribution of research effort. Critic-free policy gradients and Monte Carlo credit assignment are densely populated, while value-based methods, off-policy actor-critic training, and bootstrapping-based credit assignment remain largely unexplored despite well-established counterparts in classical RL. These gaps represent concrete opportunities for transferring proven RL techniques to LLM training. By making these gaps explicit alongside the methods that have proven effective, this survey offers researchers in both RL and LLMs a shared framework for understanding current practice and identifying promising directions for future work.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。