Skip to content
Book Open access

The Forgetting-Learning Trade-off: Making Reinforcement Learning Work for Protein Language Models

Aug 2026 · Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining V.2 · pp. 10520-10531 · 0 citations · 13 references

TL;DR

Diagnostics reveal that RL on PLMs is governed by two reward properties: verifiability, whether the reward is a fixed environment or a learned surrogate vulnerable to distribution shift, and coverage, the fraction of sequence space giving an informative gradient.

Abstract

Reinforcement learning (RL) is increasingly applied to Protein Language Models (PLMs), yet its effectiveness varies across tasks, and standard metrics such as pass@k can rise even when the model's solvable problem set is shrinking. We introduce two capability-level diagnostics. The Expansion-Shrinkage Ratio (ESR) measures how RL shifts the set of problems a PLM can solve, separating genuine gain from probability redistribution. Dual-Reward ESR reports ESR under both the training reward and an orthogonal evaluator; the gap ΔESR quantifies reward hacking as a single observable number. Applied across four protein design tasks, three RL algorithms (DPO, PPO, GRPO), and two PLM architectures, the diagnostics reveal that RL on PLMs is governed by two reward properties: verifiability, whether the reward is a fixed environment or a learned surrogate vulnerable to distribution shift, and coverage, the fraction of sequence space giving an informative gradient. The two axes produce three regimes with distinct ΔESR signatures: well-covered verifiable rewards yield genuine expansion; sparse verifiable rewards induce a coverage bottleneck; predicted rewards induce reward hacking. Controlled analyses isolate these two factors as operative, letting practitioners predict an RL run's outcome before committing to costly fine-tuning.

Read PDF

Similar papers

#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

Gradients Know What Outcomes Don't: Unlocking Reinforcement Learning for LLM Reasoning with Gradient-Aligned Rewards

Gradient-Aligned Reward (GAR), which operates in the policy's own gradient space: truncated backpropagation through the output projection layer extracts a compact gradient vector for each rollout, and cosine similarity with an expert-anchor gradient yields a dense, reasoning-aware reward with less than 9% wall-clock ov...

Le-Qi Zheng, Jin-Bo Su, Fang Niu et al. · 2 citations
Conference Aug 2026

Post-Training for Reasoning LLMs with Reinforcement Learning: A Stability–Efficiency Perspective

Reinforcement Learning (RL)-based post-training has become a key mechanism for improving reasoning Large Language Models (LLMs), especially when automated verifiers enable Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Reward (RLVR). Recent methods, however, are increasingly modular: many apparent algorithmic advances recombin...

Liu Yang, Han Zhu, Zheng-Yang Zhong et al. · 2 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Reinforcement Learning Post-Training for Reasoning Large Language Models: Methods, Systems, and Evaluation

Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a central post-training approach for reasoning and agentic large language models (LLMs), particularly when task outcomes can be verified automatically. Comparisons across this literature remain difficult because a reported gain may combine changes to the learning signal, policy co...

Liu Yang, Han Zhu, Zheng-Yang Zhong et al. · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

OpenJev-RLCD: A Working RLCD Implementation

Decision models such as Jev answer questions with probabilities, which are only useful if they are calibrated. Open-source reproductions rely on supervised fine-tuning plus temperature scaling, while reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) makes reasoning models overconfident. We present a working impleme...

Zhi-Min Gao, Pi-Chao Wang · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Aug 2026

Demystifying Reinforcement Learning Post-Training of Language Models

This work deconstructs the RL post-training algorithm, investigating each step to clarify what is actually happening beneath the surface, and uses the entropy of the policy's output distribution as a lens to compare the distributions learned through pretraining, SFT, and RL post-training, revealing how each stage shape...

D. Clay, Saket Gollapudi, Sankar V Harilal et al. · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

GRPO Training Dynamics for Small Language Models

Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) has emerged as a memory-efficient reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT) technique for reasoning-intensive tasks. How- ever, GRPO training dynamics on small language models (SLMs) remain poorly understood, limiting its reliable adoption and reproducibility in open and resource- constr...

Rajat Ghosh, Vaishnavi Bhargava, Henry Wong et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.