Free Everywhere, Exact on Trees: PPO's Dropped Correction Buys Sample Efficiency Under Aggressive Reuse
cs.LG, cs.AI
Submitted: 2026-09-30
Updated: 2026-10-04
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: Common policy improvement methods, including TRPO, PPO, and GRPO, estimate policy improvement under the behavioral policy's state-visitation distribution rather than the improved policy's own.
Terminology
Abstract
Common policy improvement methods, including TRPO, PPO, and GRPO, estimate policy improvement under the behavioral policy's state-visitation distribution rather than the improved policy's own. The substitution makes the objective estimable from the behavioral policy's rollouts but adds a bias growing with policy divergence, hence the trust region or clip, and hence no reuse of a batch far off-policy. We show that under history-injective dynamics, where each state is reached by exactly one history, the dropped state-visitation ratio equals the product of per-step policy ratios along the sampled prefix, on every trajectory and not only in expectation. The ratio is therefore restored exactly, from log-probabilities PPO already computes. Autoregressive generation and canonical-order constructive optimization are both history-injective. The exact correction pays importance-sampling variance that grows with the horizon, so we generalize it to a one-parameter family with PPO (α = 0) and the full correction (α = 1) as endpoints: a single bias--variance knob. A gradient-level analysis of the unclipped surrogate identifies two channels the correction acts through and three conditions under which it carries signal; an enumerable testbed confirms the conditions' predictions. On hard credit-assignment scheduling tasks, a short corrected warmup with aggressive early sample reuse learns faster than PPO and than the same reuse uncorrected; the marginal gain grows with task difficulty (+0.02 to +0.09 learning-curve AUC), and the early win over PPO tracks the prefix bias that reuse incurs. A correction held throughout, or applied where clipping already contains the reuse bias, is null to harmful.
Sources
- Neural Combinatorial Optimization with Reinforcement Learning
- A Step Back: Prefix Importance Ratio Stabilizes Policy Optimization
- Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms
- DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models
- DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning
- Rethinking Importance Sampling in LLM Policy Optimization: A Cumulative Token Perspective
- Group Sequence Policy Optimization
- When Importance Sampling Misallocates Credit: Asymmetric Ratios for Outcome-Supervised RL
- Qwen2.5 Technical Report
Related papers
- Polynomial-Augmented Neural Networks (PANNs) with Weak Orthogonality Constraints for Enhanced Function and PDE Approximation
- AIRL-S: Unifying Reinforcement Learning and Search-Based Test-Time Scaling via Adversarial Inverse Reinforcement Learning
- Transformers as Bayesian In-Context Experimenters: Smoothness-Adaptive Efficient ATE Estimation
- Convergence issues in Relational Concept Analysis based on AOC-posets
- Beliefs Beyond Posteriors: The Predictive Cost of ELBO Binding
- Understanding Diffusion Models via Ratio-Based Function Approximation with SignReLU Networks