Expected Return Causes Outcome-Level Mode Collapse in Reinforcement Learning and How to Fix It with Inverse Probability Scaling
Abhijeet Sinha, Sundari Elango, Dianbo Liu
Abstract
Many reinforcement learning (RL) problems admit multiple terminal solutions of comparable quality, where the goal is not to identify a single optimum but to represent a diverse set of high-quality outcomes. Nevertheless, policies trained by standard expected-return maximization routinely collapse onto a small subset of outcomes, a phenomenon commonly attributed to insufficient exploration or weak regularization. We show that this explanation is incomplete: outcome-level mode collapse is a structural consequence of the expected-return objective itself. Under idealized learning dynamics, the log-probability ratio between any two outcomes evolves linearly in their reward difference, implying exponential ratio divergence and inevitable collapse—independent of the exploration strategy, entropy regularization, or optimization algorithm. We identify the source of this pathology as the probability multiplier inside the expectation and propose a minimal correction: inverse probability scaling, which removes outcome-frequency amplification from the learning signal, fundamentally changes the learning dynamics, and provably yields reward-proportional terminal distributions, preventing collapse in multimodal settings. We instantiate this principle in Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) as a drop-in modification, IPS-GRPO, requiring no auxiliary models or architectural changes. Across different reasoning and molecular generation tasks, IPS-GRPO consistently reduces outcome-level mode collapse while matching or exceeding baseline performance, suggesting that correcting the objective rather than adding exploration heuristics is key to reliable multimodal policy optimization.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 5e6bc84d-4452-4ff9-8560-3b685249cc76Builds on15
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- The Curious Case of Neural Text DegenerationAri Holtzman, Jan Buys, Li Du, Maxwell Forbes et al.ICLR 2020 · 4,112 citations
- Scaling Laws for Reward Model OveroptimizationLeo Gao, John Schulman, Jacob HiltonICML 2023 · 963 citations
- Beyond the 80/20 Rule: High-Entropy Minority Tokens Drive Effective Reinforcement Learning for LLM ReasoningShenzhi Wang, Le Yu, Chang Gao, Chujie Zheng et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 592 citations
Related papers
- Beyond Mode Collapse: Distribution Matching for Diverse ReasoningXiaozhe Li, Yang Li, Xinyu Fang, Shengyuan Ding et al.ICML 2026 · 2 citations
- GDPO: Group reward-Decoupled Normalization Policy Optimization for Multi-reward RL OptimizationShih-Yang Liu, Xin Dong, Ximing Lu, Shizhe Diao et al.ICML 2026 · 128 citations
- On Group Relative Policy Optimization Collapse in Agent Search: The Lazy Likelihood-Displacementwenlong deng, Yushu Li, Boying Gong, YI REN et al.ICML 2026
- GRPO: Geometric GRPO; Escaping LLM's Reasoning Rut to Break Accuracy--Entropy Trade-offAli Rad, Khashayar Filom, Darioush Keivan, Peyman Mohajerin Esfahani et al.ICML 2026
- All Roads Lead to Rome: Incentivizing Divergent Thinking in Vision-Language ModelsXinyu Tian, Shu Zou, Zhaoyuan Yang, Mengqi He et al.CVPR 2026 · 1 citation
