研究发现,预训练验证损失能高精度预测RL后的pass@1准确率(相关性|ρ|从0.93提升至0.99),且每10倍RL算力的奖励增益与预训练token数对数正相关(r=+0.84)。在680M参数下,RL最优算力占比约28%。机制上,RL并非均匀增强推理,而是对困难问题生成正确动作的同时,数倍放大已偏好的错误动作,因此仅提升pass@1而非pass@16。
Can you figure out how much RL will actually buy you before you commit a month of GPU time?
This paper says you can predict it based on the checkpoint you start from. The authors recreate the entire LLM pipeline in chess -- pretraining 5M-1B models on Lichess games , SFT on synthetic reasoning traces, then GRPO on puzzles with verifiable rewards -- and sweep 36 pretraining-RL combinations.
Signal is mostly carried by two pretraining properties. The pretraining validation loss predicts the post-RL pass@1, with the fit tightening from |ρ|=0.93 to 0.99 as the reference RL compute increases; and the reward gained per 10× of RL compute increases with log pretraining tokens (Pearson r=+0.84). The same two patterns are seen in a 1B model trained on math text.
The fitted frontier puts RL’s compute-optimal share at around 20% at 50M parameters, and 28% at 680M. With budget, the share increases but remains a minority.
The mechanism is the part worth noticing. RL is not uniform sharpening: on the hardest puzzles it generates correct moves to almost non-existent levels after SFT, but makes already-preferred wrong moves many times more often.
That is why they get pass@1 gains but not pass@16 gains, and it leads the work in a different direction: suppress wrong-mode amplification, rather than sharpen harder.
– arxiv. org/abs/2607.16097
Title: "Understanding Reasoning from Pretraining to Post-Training"
来源:Rohan Paul · x.com