Paper detail

Reflective Prompted Policy Optimization: Trajectory-Grounded Revision and Salience Bias

Existing LLM-based policy optimizers see only scalar rewards: that a policy scored 0.45, but not whether the agent got stuck in a loop, fell into a hole on the third step, or performed well on 19 out of 20 rollouts and failed catastrophically on one. We propose Reflective Prompted Policy Optimization (R2PO), a two-stage LLM framework for policy search over compact policy classes that augments scalar reward feedback with trajectory-level behavioral evidence. A Search-LLM proposes candidate policy parameters; the environment executes them; a Critic-LLM inspects the resulting rollouts and proposes targeted revisions grounded in observed states, actions, and rewards. Across ten environments, ablations show R2PO's gains require separating global search from behavior-grounded revision and using selection to filter high-variance edits. We further identify a dominant failure mode, salience bias: when presented with multiple rollouts, the Critic-LLM fixates on improving a single failure even when most trajectories succeed. In a three-trajectory variant where the Critic-LLM sees the best, worst, and median rollout, this behavior explains 76.6% of regressions on CartPole. R2PO mitigates this by reasoning over aggregate rollout statistics, median-trajectory selection, and a revision rule. Using a 20B open-weight model, R2PO achieves the highest mean best reward across all ten environments, reaches near-optimal performance substantially earlier (e.g., near-maximum CartPole reward within ~500 episodes), and trains far more stably than both deep RL and prior LLM-based methods. These results show that treating trajectories as first-class in-context evidence, rather than artifacts reduced to scalar returns, changes how even comparatively small LLMs search over policy spaces, enabling them to learn faster, diagnose more precisely, and reliably improve external controllers.

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.