Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?

Yang Yue, Zhiqi Chen, Rui Lu, Andrew Zhao, Zhaokai Wang, Yang Yue, Shiji Song, Gao Huang

Keywords: reinforcement learning with verifiable reward, reasoning LLM

TL;DR: We systematically examine the current state of RLVR and surprisingly find that it does not elicit fundamentally new reasoning patterns—revealing a gap between the potential of RL and the actual impact of current RLVR methods.

Abstract: Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has recently demonstrated notable success in enhancing the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs), particularly in mathematics and programming tasks. It is widely believed that, similar to how traditional RL helps agents to explore and learn new strategies, RLVR enables LLMs to continuously self-improve, thus acquiring novel reasoning abilities that exceed the capacity of the corresponding base models. In this study, we take a critical look at \textit{the current state of RLVR} by systematically probing the reasoning capability boundaries of RLVR-trained LLMs across diverse model families, RL algorithms, and math/coding/visual reasoning benchmarks, using pass@\textit{k} at large \textit{k} values as the evaluation metric. While RLVR improves sampling efficiency towards the correct path, we surprisingly find that current training does \emph{not} elicit fundamentally new reasoning patterns. We observe that while RLVR-trained models outperform their base models at smaller values of (\eg, k=1), base models achieve higher pass@k score when k is large. Moreover, we observe that the reasoning capability boundary of LLMs often narrows as RLVR training progresses. Further coverage and perplexity analysis shows that the reasoning paths generated by RLVR models are already included in the base models' sampling distribution, suggesting that their reasoning abilities originate from and are \textit{bounded} by the base model. From this perspective, treating the base model as an upper bound, our quantitative analysis shows that six popular RLVR algorithms perform similarly and remain far from optimal in fully leveraging the potential of the base model. In contrast, we find that distillation can introduce new reasoning patterns from the teacher and genuinely expand the model’s reasoning capabilities. Taken together, our findings suggest that current RLVR methods have not fully realized the potential of RL to elicit genuinely novel reasoning abilities in LLMs. This underscores the need for improved RL paradigms—such as continual scaling and multi-turn agent-environment interaction—to unlock this potential.

Submission Number: 7