All papersReasoning & AgentsShanghai Jiao Tong University

What Drives the Zero-to-One Jump? Diagnosing and Steering Hard-Prompt Learning in RLVR

/ Paper arXiv 2611.02747

Key numbers

10.0…accelerates early solution discovery and improves Pass@256 by 10.0 points on AIME24 and 6.6 points on…

From the paperCopied from the abstract, not written by AI.

Abstract

From the paperThe authors' own words.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has substantially improved mathematical reasoning, yet progress on hard prompts often stalls: a prompt can remain unsolved for many training steps before abruptly transitioning to solved--a discrete "zero-to-one" jump whose underlying dynamics and steerability remain poorly understood. We investigate two questions: what drives this transition, and can it be steered? Through event-based analysis measuring the time-to-first-positive (TTFP), we find that negative rollouts preceding successful transitions consistently retain higher early-stage generation entropy, distinguishing near-solvable failures from dead ends. This signal motivates NAPO (Negative-Augmented Policy Optimization), a method integrated with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) that ranks negatives in unsolved groups via an early-branching driver and assigns graded advantages, injecting informative gradients precisely where standard group-relative updates vanish. Under fixed rollout budgets, NAPO accelerates early solution discovery and improves Pass@256 by 10.0 points on AIME24 and 6.6 points on AIME2025, demonstrating that zero-to-one transitions are diagnosable and steerable through driver-guided negative learning. Our code is available at https://github.com/jameszhu-pixel-time/Z2O.

From the full paper

From the paperCopied from the paper itself by our code.

Reading the paper on arXiv…

Where it fits

The most cited papers it builds on, and the papers that build on it.

/ Builds on 3 most cited

  1. 201733.5k citedProximal Policy Optimization Algorithms ↗
  2. 202226k citedTraining language models to follow instructions with human feedback ↗
  3. 202112.8k citedEvaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code ↗

/ Built on by None yet

No papers cite it yet. We check again every week.

From Semantic Scholar, updated weekly.

Try it

Code, models and demos that use this paper.

Ask this paper

/ Ask a questionAnswers come from the full paper and name the section

    / Your notes

    Select text in the abstract to highlight it or add a note. They stay in this browser.

      Read the PDF