Papers for

ai training engineers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Language agent training improves credit assignment with selective replay and evolving rubrics

CREDO: Variance-Guided Rubric Evolution for Replay-Corrected Credit Assignment

Abstract: Long-horizon language agents receive sparse terminal feedback, while intermediate rubrics provide structured but potentially misspecified assessments of progress. In resettable training environments, counterfactual continuation rollouts can measure local credit, but exhaustive replay is costly. We propose Credo, a framework that couples evolving semantic rubrics with selective, execution-based credit correction. A frozen judge maps visible transitions to rubric features, and a credit head predicts the change in expected terminal reward associated with the realized transition. Independently sampled two-sided replays correct prediction residuals using their recorded inclusion probabilities. We derive conditional unbiasedness and a variance decomposition that connects two design choices: which rubric features to retain, and where to allocate a fixed expected replay budget. The resulting criterion weights prediction errors by policy-score sensitivity and missing replay coverage; its allocation rule additionally accounts for continuation cost. We also describe a practical mixture with terminal leave-one-out advantages and distinguish its clipped, token-normalized PPO implementation from the ideal policy-gradient estimator. This preliminary report provides the method, proofs, an exact finite-model audit, and a controlled evaluation protocol. It makes no claim of empirical superiority on language-agent benchmarks.

Mon 21 SeptArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Training language agents to perform complex tasks is hard because feedback often only comes at the end, making it difficult to know which actions helped. The authors propose Credo, a method that uses intermediate progress assessments combined with carefully chosen replay of past actions to better assign credit to useful steps. Credo updates its scoring rules over time and decides when and what to review to improve training efficiency. This helps the agent learn more reliably without needing to replay everything exhaustively.
Open 2609.24174v1

Ppo critics suffer from value flattening that sparse updates reduce

Rethinking Critic Learning in PPO: Understanding and Mitigating Value Flattening

Abstract: In reinforcement learning for large language models, Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) commonly uses a critic to estimate state values and reduce the variance of policy updates. However, we uncover a systematic failure mode in PPO critics, which we call Value Flattening: state values, estimated from multiple Monte Carlo continuations, change sharply across intermediate states while critic predictions remain comparatively flat. We further observe this phenomenon in a controlled FrozenLake environment and find that it becomes more pronounced as the state space grows. Our theoretical and empirical analyses relate Value Flattening to an implicit variance penalty in the critic loss and redundant updates from temporally correlated states with similar gradients. Motivated by these findings, we introduce SParse Proximal Policy Optimization (SP$^3$O), which applies the value loss to only a few well-separated states in each response to mitigate both effects. Experiments on Qwen3-Base show that SP$^3$O with only three states supervised per response can mitigate Value Flattening and consistently improve the learned policy across model sizes and evaluation suites. Together, our results identify Value Flattening as an important yet overlooked failure mode of critic learning in standard PPO and show that a simple sparse supervision strategy can mitigate it.

Wed 16 SeptMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence
The gist
In reinforcement learning, a method called Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) uses a value-predicting part, called the critic, to help improve decisions. The authors discovered that critics often get stuck giving nearly the same value estimates even when actual state values vary a lot, a problem they call Value Flattening. They showed this effect worsens with larger problems and found it is caused by how the learning updates are done. To fix this, they propose checking and updating only a few well-chosen states at a time, which helps the critic learn more accurate values and leads to better overall policies.
Open 2609.18708v1