Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

Reinforcement Learning from Rich Feedback with Distributional DAgger

About

Reasoning models have advanced rapidly, but the dominant reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) recipe remains surprisingly narrow: sample many responses and reward each with a single bit indicating whether the final answer is correct. Yet many settings provide rich feedback, including execution traces, tool outputs, expert corrections, and model self-evaluations. We study how to use such feedback through a distributional variant of the classic imitation learning algorithm DAgger, where the learner has local access to an expert distribution on states visited by the current policy. This yields a simple forward cross-entropy objective that admits a blackbox expert and whose sequence-level gradient {conduct rich credit assignment by propagating} future expert-student disagreement back to earlier decisions. We show that prior RL with self-distillation objectives based on reverse KL or Jensen-Shannon fail to guarantee monotonic policy improvement: even when the expert has higher reward, their updates may increase probability on worse actions. In contrast, we show that forward cross-entropy admits monotonic policy improvement and enjoys guarantees on regret. We further show that our objective optimizes a lower bound on teacher-weighted likelihood of success, leading to improved Pass@N. Empirically, our approach, DistIL, improves over RLVR and RL with self-distillation baselines across a variety of domains: scientific reasoning, coding, and solving hard mathematical problems.

Rishabh Agrawal, Jacob Fein-Ashley, Paria Rashidinejad• 2026

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Scientific ReasoningBiology
Avg@1666.6
24
Scientific ReasoningSciKnowEval L3
Chemistry Score81
18
Mathematical ReasoningAIME 25
Avg Score (AIME 25)71.1
12
Mathematical ReasoningHMMT25
Average Score46.4
12
Mathematical ReasoningAMC 23
Average Score96.6
12
Mathematical ReasoningMinerva
Average Score49.5
12
Mathematical ReasoningAIME24
Average Score76.4
12
ReasoningReasoning Benchmarks Biology, Chemistry, Material, Physics, Tool Use
Biology Accuracy55.3
11
Scientific ReasoningPhysics
Accuracy80.8
10
Scientific ReasoningChemistry
Accuracy80.8
10
Showing 10 of 11 rows

Other info

GitHub

Follow for update