Artificial Intelligence

   

Advantage Scale Calibration Imbalance in Group-Relative Optimization under Low-Variance Rewards: Diagnosis and Bounded Recovery

Authors: Fei Ding, Runhao Liu, Yongkang Zhang, Yuhao Liao, Zijian Zeng, Huiming Yang

In verifier-style RLVR, group-relative optimization often treats advantage scale as an implementation detail. This paper separates two low-variance cases: sub-resolution jitter that should not become a preference signal, and credible but small cardinal gaps that should be learned without distorting KL calibration. We propose an advantage-scale three-way calibration interface: the same within-group scale denominator simultaneously determines the reward-branch strength, prompt-level batch weight, and the effective KL calibration induced when the reward branch is re-expressed on the original cardinal scale. This interface explains why RLOO / Dr.GRPO can let credible small gaps become KL dominated, whereas GRPO's standard-deviation denominator can amplify tiny gaps without bound. Based on this interface, we further introduce the Reward-Resolution Protocol and MaxNorm-AC, respectively filtering sub-resolution gaps and providing bounded cardinal recovery on credible nonzero gaps. Across dense / MoE architectures and math / code reasoning, MaxNorm-AC improves over the prespecified percentile-scale reference (p = 90, hereafter the p90 reference) while truncating the low-variance inverse-scale tail.

Comments: 9 Pages.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2026-08-14 20:41:21

Unique-IP document downloads: 0 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus