arXiv preprint ·
Compositional RL: Evaluating and Training LLMs for Collaborative Reasoning
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Language models are often evaluated alone but increasingly deployed together, routed between, made to debate, ensembled, or collaboratively trained. For a model inside a system, what matters most is not how well it performs on its own, but how much the system gains from its presence. We call this a model's compositional strength and formalize it using the Shapley value of a cooperative game over coalitions of a model pool, and use a model's leave-one-out contribution to the full coalition as a tractable proxy, requiring n+1 rather than 2^n system evaluations. Evaluating individual vs. compositional strengths across five model pools, twelve collaboration methods, and twelve datasets, we find them largely uncorrelated: in 12 of 15 (pool, method-family) settings, individual strength does not translate into compositional advantages, and the coupling is weakest among general-purpose models that practitioners are most likely to deploy. Standalone benchmarks are therefore often poor proxies for models' value in collaborative systems. We then propose compositional reinforcement learning (C-RL), which trains a policy inside a live multi-model system and rewards the outcome produced by the system as a whole, rather than the policy's correctness in isolation. The leave-one-out baseline in Shapley values cancels under a group policy gradient, so this needs no additional rollout cost beyond RL on the collaborative system's outcome and never requires running a coalition without the policy. Across three collaboration protocols and eight tasks spanning reasoning, coding, and scientific discovery, C-RL produces the strongest collaborator in 21 of 24 settings, lifting collaborative performance by +4.0 to +5.4 pts on average (~3x the gain of baselines), up to +13.1 pts.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
PAIR: Memory-Efficient and Fast Inference with Reading--Reasoning Fusion
Everyone Was Right: Lexical Representations in Language Models Are Both Abstract and Holistic
Improving the Evaluation of Biomedical Question Answering with Few Human Preference Signals
Many Steps into One: Reasoning Contraction and the Limits of Safe Memory Reuse for LLM Agents
Of Errors and Echoes: Responsibility-Aware Credit Assignment for Tool-Use Agents
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.