Paper detail

Maximizing Rollout Informativeness under a Fixed Budget: A Submodular View of Tree Search for Tool-Use Agentic Reinforcement Learning

We formalize Rollout Informativeness under a Fixed Budget (RIFB) as the expected non-vanishing policy-gradient mass that a tool-use rollout set injects into Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). We prove that any budget-agnostic independent sampler suffers a collapse rate bounded away from zero for hard prompts regardless of the budget. Motivated by this, we recast intermediate state selection as a monotone submodular maximization problem, where a greedy one-step selector enjoys a 1 minus 1/e approximation guarantee. Our Uncertainty-aware Upper Confidence Bound (UUCB) terms arise as closed-form marginal gains of this objective. This turns the token-level entropy bonus from an empirical trick into an analytic consequence of the formulation. We present InfoTree, a training-time tree-search framework coupling UUCB with a learned Adaptive Budget Allocator (ABA) and an asynchronous Speculative Expansion scheme. ABA rescues prompts whose initial tree is wasted on uniform outcomes, lifting the mixed-outcome ratio from 58.1 percent to 76.3 percent with less than 5 percent budget overhead. Speculative Expansion reduces wall-clock overhead from 14.3 percent to 4.8 percent by tolerating bounded staleness in UUCB scores. Across nine benchmarks spanning math reasoning (AIME 2024 and 2025, MATH-500, OlympiadBench, USAMO), web-search agents (GAIA, HLE-100, BrowseComp-lite), and tool-rich coding and OS agents (APPS-verified, AgentBench-OS), InfoTree outperforms flat GRPO, DeepSearch, Tree-GRPO, AT2PO, CW-GRPO, and RC-GRPO. Head-to-head compositions with Tree-GRPO prefix sharing and CW-GRPO contribution weights deliver further gains, confirming that our selector operates orthogonally to rollout reuse and trajectory re-weighting. A 5 by 5 by 5 robustness grid reveals that over three quarters of the hyperparameter space lies on a performance plateau, confirming UUCB robustness.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.