Does Reinforcement Fine-Tuning Improve Generalization of LLM Agents? An Empirical Study
Zhiheng Xi, Xin Guo, Jiaqi Liu, Jiazheng Zhang, Yutao Fan, Zhihao Zhang, Shichun Liu, Mingxu Chai, Xiaowei Shi, Yitao Zhai, Xunliang Cai, Tao Gui
Abstract
Reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT) has shown promise for training LLM agents to perform multi-turn decision-making based on environment feedback. However, most existing evaluations remain largely in-domain—training and testing are conducted in the same environment or even on the same tasks. In real-worlddeployment, agents may operate in unseen environments with different background knowledge, observation spaces, and action interfaces. To characterize the generalization profile of RFT under such shifts, we conduct a systematic study along three axes: (1) within-environment generalization across task difficulty, (2) cross-environment transfer to unseen environments, and (3) sequential multi-environment training to quantify transfer and forgetting. Our results show that RFT generalizes well across task difficulty within an environment, but exhibits unstable transfer to unseen environments, which correlates with shifts in both semantic priors and observation/action interfaces. In contrast, sequential training yields promising downstream gains with minimal upstream forgetting, and mixture training across environments improves the overall balance. We further provide detailed analyses and deeper insights, and hope our work helps the community develop and deploy generalizable LLM agents.
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 bb543dad-9548-4125-a88e-1c8c541e1b84Builds on31
- 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
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learningNoah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,828 citations
- Let's Verify Step by StepHunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yuri Burda, Harrison Edwards et al.ICLR 2024 · 3,045 citations
- DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at ScaleQiying Yu, Zheng Zhang, Ruofei Zhu, Yufeng Yuan et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 2,828 citations
Related papers
- Breaking Barriers: Do Reinforcement Post Training Gains Transfer To Unseen Domains?Chuxuan Hu, Yuxuan Zhu, Antony Kellermann, Caleb Biddulph et al.ICLR 2026
- Can Agents Generalize to the Open World? Unveiling the Fragility of Static Training in Tool UseWeiming Wu, Song-Lin Lv, Rui Zhu, Zijian Cheng et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
- Why Does Reinforcement Learning Generalize? A Feature-Level Mechanistic Study of Post-Training in Large Language ModelsDan Shi, Zhuowen Han, Simon Ostermann, Renren Jin et al.ACL 2026 · 1 citation
- Don't Just Fine-tune the Agent, Tune the EnvironmentSiyuan Lu, Zechuan Wang, Hongxuan Zhang, Qintong Wu et al.ICLR 2026 · 13 citations
- Mapping Post-Training Forgetting in Language Models at ScaleJackson Harmon, Andreas Hochlehnert, Matthias Bethge, Ameya PrabhuICLR 2026 · 8 citations
