KL-Regularized Reinforcement Learning for Generative Modelling is Designed to Mode Collapse
Anthony GX-Chen, Jatin Prakash, Jeff Guo, Rob Fergus, Rajesh Ranganath
Abstract
It is commonly believed that optimizing the reverse KL divergence results in "mode seeking", while optimizing forward KL results in "mass covering", with the latter being preferred if the goal is to sample from multiple diverse modes. We showmathematically and empirically-that this intuition does not necessarily transfer well to doing reinforcement learning with reverse/forward KL regularization (e.g. as commonly used with language models). Instead, the choice of reverse/forward KL determines the family of optimal target distributions, parameterized by the regularization coefficient. Mode coverage depends primarily on other factors, such as regularization strength, and relative scales between rewards and reference probabilities. Further, we show commonly used settings such as low regularization strength and equal verifiable rewards tend to specify unimodal target distributions, meaning the optimization objective is, by construction, non-diverse. We leverage these insights to construct a simple, scalable, and theoretically justified algorithm. It makes minimal changes to reward magnitudes, yet optimizes for a target distribution which puts high probability over all high-quality sampling modes. In experiments, this simple modification works to post-train both Large Language Models and Chemical Language Models to have higher solution quality and diversity, without any external signals of diversity, and works with both forward and reverse KL when using either naively fails.
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 6f46c3d6-31d2-44f1-8ca4-39ccfb156af6Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on21
- 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
- STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With ReasoningEric Zelikman, Yuhuai Wu, Jesse Mu, Noah D. GoodmanNeurIPS 2022 · 1,126 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
- WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the WildWenting Zhao, Xiang Ren, Jack Hessel, Claire Cardie et al.ICLR 2024 · 504 citations
Related papers
- Whatever Remains Must Be True: Filtering Drives Reasoning in LLMs, Shaping DiversityGermán Kruszewski, Pierre Erbacher, Jos Rozen, Marc DymetmanICLR 2026 · 3 citations
- The Choice of Divergence: A Neglected Key to Mitigating Diversity Collapse in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable RewardLong Li, Zhijian Zhou, Jiaran Hao, Jason Klein Liu et al.ICLR 2026 · 46 citations
- -Divergence Regularized RLHF: Two Tales of Sampling and Unified AnalysesDi Wu, Chengshuai Shi, Jing Yang, Cong ShenICML 2026
- SAGE: Shaping Anchors for Guided Exploration in RLVR of LLMsChanuk Lee, Minki Kang, Sung Ju HwangICML 2026 · 1 citation
- FlowRL: Matching Reward Distributions for LLM ReasoningXuekai Zhu, Daixuan Cheng, Dinghuai Zhang, Hengli Li et al.ICLR 2026 · 41 citations
