LLMs are Greedy Agents: Effects of RL Fine-tuning on Decision-Making Abilities
Thomas Schmied, Jörg Bornschein, Jordi Grau-Moya, Markus Wulfmeier, Razvan Pascanu
Abstract
The success of Large Language Models (LLMs) has sparked interest in various agentic applications. A key hypothesis is that LLMs, leveraging common sense and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning, can effectively explore and efficiently solve complex domains. However, LLM agents have been found to suffer from sub-optimal exploration and the knowing-doing gap, the inability to effectively act on knowledge present in the model. In this work, we systematically study why LLMs perform sub-optimally in decision-making scenarios. In particular, we closely examine three prevalent failure modes: greediness, frequency bias, and the knowing-doing gap. We propose mitigation of these shortcomings by fine-tuning via Reinforcement Learning (RL) on self-generated CoT rationales. Our experiments across multi-armed bandits, contextual bandits, and Tic-tac-toe, demonstrate that RL fine-tuning enhances the decisionmaking abilities of LLMs by increasing exploration and narrowing the knowing-doing gap. Finally, we study both classic exploration mechanisms, such as 𝜖-greedy, and LLM-specific approaches, such as self-correction and self-consistency, to enable more effective fine-tuning of LLMs for decision-making.
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 76aa314d-5737-48f7-a10d-1d92ff68d871Cited by top-tier papers10
- ProRL: Prolonged Reinforcement Learning Expands Reasoning Boundaries in Large Language ModelsMingjie Liu, Shizhe Diao, Ximing Lu, Jian Hu et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 181 citations
- SRFT: A Single-Stage Method with Supervised and Reinforcement Fine-Tuning for ReasoningYuqian Fu, Tinghong Chen, Jiajun Chai, Xihuai Wang et al.ICLR 2026 · 97 citations
- Kevin: Multi-Turn RL for Generating CUDA KernelsCarlo Baronio, Pietro Marsella, Ben Pan, Simon Guo et al.ICLR 2026 · 81 citations
- The Hot Mess of AI: How Does Misalignment Scale With Model Intelligence and Task Complexity?Alexander Hägele, Aryo Pradipta Gema, Henry Sleight, Ethan Perez et al.ICLR 2026 · 10 citations
- Formalizing Learning from Language Feedback with Provable GuaranteesWanqiao Xu, Allen Nie, Ruijie Zheng, Aditya Modi et al.ICML 2026 · 8 citations
Builds on35
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language ModelsEdward J. Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu et al.ICLR 2022 · 18,833 citations
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learningNoah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,828 citations
Related papers
- Fine-Tuning Large Vision-Language Models as Decision-Making Agents via Reinforcement LearningSimon Zhai, Hao Bai, Zipeng Lin, Jiayi Pan et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 214 citations
- Plan Then Action: High-Level Planning Guidance Reinforcement Learning for LLM ReasoningZhihao Dou, Qinjian Zhao, Zhongwei Wan, Zhang Dinggen et al.ICML 2026 · 24 citations
- How Far Are We from Optimal Reasoning Efficiency?Jiaxuan Gao, Shu Yan, Qixin Tan, Lu Yang et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 12 citations
- Large Language Models Can Self-ImproveJiaxin Huang, Shixiang Gu, Le Hou, Yuexin Wu et al.EMNLP 2023 · 184 citations
- When More is Less: Understanding Chain-of-Thought Length in LLMsYuyang Wu, Yifei Wang, Ziyu Ye, Tianqi Du et al.ICLR 2026 · 225 citations
