FAPO: Flawed-Aware Policy Optimization for Efficient and Reliable Reasoning
Yuyang Ding, Chi Zhang, Juntao Li, Haibin Lin, Xin Liu, Min Zhang
Abstract
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has emerged as a promising paradigm for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). In this context, models explore reasoning trajectories and exploit rollouts with correct answers as positive signals for policy optimization. However, these rollouts might involve flawed patterns such as answer-guessing and jump-in-reasoning. Such flawed-positive rollouts are rewarded identically to fully correct ones, causing policy models to internalize these unreliable reasoning patterns. In this work, we first conduct a systematic study of flawed-positive rollouts in RL and find that they enable rapid capability gains during the early optimization stage, while constraining reasoning capability later by reinforcing unreliable patterns. Building on these insights, we propose Flawed-Aware Policy Optimization (FAPO), which presents a parameter-free reward penalty for flawed-positive rollouts, enabling the policy to leverage them as useful shortcuts in the warm-up stage, securing stable early gains, while gradually shifting optimization toward reliable reasoning in the later refinement stage. To accurately and comprehensively detect flawed-positive rollouts, we introduce a generative reward model (GenRM) with a process-level reward that precisely localizes reasoning errors. Experiments show that FAPO is effective in broad domains, improving outcome correctness, process reliability, and training stability without increasing the token budget.
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.
Builds on10
- 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
- Let's Verify Step by StepHunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yuri Burda, Harrison Edwards et al.ICLR 2024 · 3,045 citations
- Scaling Laws for Reward Model OveroptimizationLeo Gao, John Schulman, Jacob HiltonICML 2023 · 963 citations
- ReTool: Reinforcement Learning for Strategic Tool Use in LLMsJiazhan Feng, Shijue Huang, Xingwei Qu, Ge Zhang et al.ICLR 2026 · 406 citations
- ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical ReasoningChujie Zheng, Zhenru Zhang, Beichen Zhang, Runji Lin et al.ACL 2025 · 209 citations
Related papers
- Experience Augmented Policy Optimization for LLM ReasoningJinda Lu, Kexin Huang, Junkang Wu, Shuo Yang et al.ICML 2026 · 2 citations
- Reasoning Models Hallucinate More: Factuality-Aware Reinforcement Learning for Large Reasoning ModelsJunyi Li, Hwee Tou NgNeurIPS 2025 · 20 citations
- Graph Reasoning Paradigm: Structured and Symbolic Reasoning with Topology-Aware Reinforcement Learning for Large Language ModelsRunxuan Liu, Xianhao Ou, Xinyan Ma, Jiyuan Wang et al.ACL 2026
- Rethinking Sample Polarity in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable RewardsXinyu Tang, Yuliang Zhan, Zhixun Li, Xin Zhao et al.ACL 2026 · 20 citations
- Lookahead Tree-Based Rollouts for Enhanced Trajectory-Level Exploration in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable RewardsShangyu Xing, Siyuan Wang, Chenyuan Yang, Xin-Yu Dai et al.ICLR 2026 · 14 citations
