CORE: Concept-Oriented Reinforcement for Bridging the Definition-Application Gap in Mathematical Reasoning
Zijun Gao, Zhikun Xu, Xiao Ye, Ben Zhou
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) often solve challenging math exercises yet fail to apply the concept right when the problem requires genuine understanding. Popular Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) pipelines reinforce final answers but provide little fine-grained conceptual signal, so models improve at pattern reuse rather than conceptual applications. We introduce (Concept-Oriented REinforcement), an RL training framework that turns explicit concepts into a controllable supervision signal. Starting from a high-quality, low-contamination textbook resource that links verifiable exercises to concise concept descriptions, we run a sanity probe showing LLMs can restate definitions but fail concept-linked quizzes, quantifying the conceptual reasoning gap. then (i) synthesizes concept-aligned quizzes, (ii) injects brief concept snippets during rollouts to elicit concept-primed trajectories, and (iii) reinforces conceptual reasoning via trajectory replacement after group failures, a lightweight forward-KL constraint that aligns unguided with concept-primed policies, or standard GRPO directly on concept-aligned quizzes. Across several models, delivers consistent gains over vanilla and SFT baselines on both in-domain concept--exercise suites and diverse out-of-domain math benchmarks. unifies direct training on concept-aligned quizzes and concept-injected rollouts under outcome regularization. It provides fine-grained conceptual supervision that bridges problem-solving competence and genuine conceptual reasoning, while remaining algorithm- and verifier-agnostic.
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 87ba50cd-c6ec-4990-8534-7bf06c69021bBuilds on13
- Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language ModelsAitor Lewkowycz, Anders Andreassen, David Dohan, Ethan Dyer et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 2,039 citations
- Llemma: An Open Language Model for MathematicsZhangir Azerbayev, Hailey Schoelkopf, Keiran Paster, Marco Dos Santos et al.ICLR 2024 · 433 citations
- Reasoning or Memorization? Unreliable Results of Reinforcement Learning Due to Data ContaminationMingqi Wu, Zhihao Zhang, Qiaole Dong, Zhiheng Xi et al.AAAI 2026 · 67 citations
- HybridFlow: A Flexible and Efficient RLHF FrameworkGuangming Sheng, Chi Zhang, Zilingfeng Ye, Xibin Wu et al.EuroSys 2025 · 61 citations
- Dynamic Prompt Learning via Policy Gradient for Semi-structured Mathematical ReasoningPan Lu, Liang Qiu, Kai-Wei Chang, Ying Nian Wu et al.ICLR 2023 · 41 citations
Related papers
- Supervised Reinforcement Learning: From Expert Trajectories to Step-wise ReasoningYihe Deng, I-Hung Hsu, Jun Yan, Zifeng Wang et al.ICLR 2026 · 11 citations
- Contextual Rollout Bandits for Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable RewardsXiaodong Lu, Xiaohan Wang, Jiajun Chai, Guojun Yin et al.ICML 2026 · 7 citations
- Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?Zhiqi Chen, Rui Lu, Andrew Zhao, Zhaokai Wang et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 1,109 citations
- From Verifiable Dot to Reward Chain: Harnessing Verifiable Reference-based Rewards for Reinforcement Learning of Open-ended GenerationYuxin Jiang, Yufei Wang, Qiyuan Zhang, Xingshan Zeng et al.ICLR 2026 · 5 citations
- Quagmires in SFT-RL Post-Training: When High SFT Scores Mislead and What to Use InsteadFeiyang Kang, Michael Kuchnik, Karthik Padthe, Marin Vlastelica et al.ICLR 2026 · 27 citations
