Papers
arxiv:2610.39671

Incentivizing Self-Learning in Large Language Models via Reinforcement Learning

Published on Oct 29
· Submitted by
Lingkai Kong
on Nov 12
#3 Paper of the day
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) draw on parametric knowledge and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to solve knowledge-intensive tasks. Yet problem solving in unfamiliar domains calls for tightly coupled knowledge acquisition and reasoning, beyond factual retrieval and aggregation or learning solely from a preassembled context. We study self-learning -- autonomously retrieving, studying, and applying knowledge from long-form reference materials on the fly. To investigate this capability, we formulate a textbook-based mathematical problem-solving task. LLMs must navigate textbook exposition, learn and apply relevant principles, and construct proofs for exercises, with reference solutions withheld. We introduce a BookNavigator interface to support this human-inspired study process and incentivize self-learning through reinforcement learning (RL) with fine-grained rewards. Experiments show that our method improves performance across in-domain and out-of-domain textbooks and subjects, raising Intern-S2-Preview-35B's overall proof accuracy from 51.5% to 79.5% and outperforming RL-trained textbook-free and fixed-retrieval baselines. These gains extend to complex long-context benchmarks involving different task types, with improvements over the base model of 1.7 and 2.3 percentage points on BrowseComp-Plus and CL-bench, respectively. Together, these findings suggest that RL can foster a domain-agnostic self-learning strategy, highlighting the potential of self-learning from long-form corpora to strengthen broader problem-solving capabilities on complex, long-context tasks.

Community

We study self-learning—autonomously retrieving, studying, and applying knowledge from long-form reference materials on the fly.

Paper submitter
•
This comment has been hidden

Navigating a textbook with the reference solutions withheld is much closer to how people learn a new subject than plain retrieval. I like that the BookNavigator interface rewards the study process in fine-grained steps, not only the final proof. Did the models learn to revisit earlier chapters, or mostly read forward?

Really interesting setup, and the ablation is the part I keep thinking about: correctness-only GRPO lifts overall proof accuracy from 51.5% to 74.9%, yet tool-using trajectories drop from 36.9% to 6.7%, so the model improves by consulting the textbook less. The annealed exploration bonus bringing that back to 79.9% while also improving OOD-Book and OOD-Subject accuracy is a nice result. I build study tools for students, so the BookNavigator idea of browsing the table of contents before reading resonates a lot. Did you look at which kinds of sections the trained policy tends to open (definitions, theorems, or proofs of general results), and whether that pattern shifts between in-domain and unseen textbooks?

Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2610.39671
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.39671 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.39671 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2610.39671 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.