2605.28388v1 May 27, 2026 cs.AI

Mechanistically Interpreting the Role of Sample Difficulty in RLVR for LLMs

Jiajun Zhang
Jiajun Zhang
Citations: 1,391
h-index: 7
Zheng Wang
Zheng Wang
Citations: 17
h-index: 1
Weiwei Xing
Weiwei Xing
Citations: 12
h-index: 2
Zhanxing Zhu
Zhanxing Zhu
Citations: 50
h-index: 4
Yue Cheng
Yue Cheng
Citations: 14
h-index: 2
Xiaohui Gao
Xiaohui Gao
Citations: 6
h-index: 2

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Reward (RLVR) is empirically shown to notably enhance the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs), particularly in mathematics and programming. However, the mechanistic role of Sample Difficulty in RLVR remains poorly understood. In this paper, we investigate RLVR through the lens of difficulty-wise and one-sample analysis. We find that sample difficulty has a non-monotonic effect on RLVR: easy and medium-difficulty problems yield the strongest and most stable reasoning improvements, whereas overly hard problems often provide weak learning signals, induce degenerate behaviors such as answer repetition or skipping necessary computation, and can ultimately degrade the model's pre-existing capabilities. Beyond the obverse of response, we further analyze the model's internal feature dynamics using Temporal Sparse Autoencoders (T-SAE). Easy problems mainly reinforce direct-answer and basic-computation features while suppressing deliberative-reasoning features; hard problems activate reasoning-related features but become useful only when successful trajectories are sampled; medium-difficulty problems provide a more balanced signal, strengthening both computation and multi-step reasoning features. Motivated by these findings, we propose difficulty-adaptive strategies for hard-sample utilization, using backward-reasoning reformulation and T-SAE-guided training signals to improve reward density and credit assignment during RLVR. Overall, our results identify sample difficulty as a key factor governing both the optimization dynamics and representation evolution of RLVR.

0 Citations
0 Influential
3.5 Altmetric
17.5 Score
Original PDF

No Analysis Report Yet

This paper hasn't been analyzed by Gemini yet.

Log in to request an AI analysis.

댓글

댓글을 작성하려면 로그인하세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 번째 댓글을 남겨보세요!