PreprintCited by 3Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningTopic Modeling

MiMo-V2.6: Scaling Reinforcement Learning Towards Self-Improvement

Open access
Core Team, Qiao, Zongming, Hua, Ziyue, Ou, Zirui, Yue, Zihao, Jiang, Zihan, Huang, Zhuo, Chen, Zhiyang +141 more·2026·arXiv

Abstract

Reinforcement learning (RL) is the central training paradigm for advancing large foundation models towards self-improvement. This report introduces the MiMo-V2.6 series, an omni-modal family that pushes the frontier of model intelligence by scaling RL compute. Prior to RL, we conduct mid-training on a broad multimodal corpus to provide ample exploration space, and build a solid infrastructure on the pretrained hybrid-SWA architecture to support subsequent scale-up. We scale RL compute along three dimensions: (1) larger batches and higher throughput, with an asynchronous training that consumes 1,568 samples and 2.7-3.7B tokens per step at context lengths of up to 1M; (2) more diverse and complex environments, spanning code, general, visual, and cyber domains under a mixture of agent harnesses; and (3) more grader compute, via groupwise agentic grading that yields more accurate reward signals for long-horizon tasks and steers the model towards shorter, more token-efficient solutions. To keep training stable at scale, we freeze the MoE router and establish a multi-layer defense against reward hacking. We further build infrastructure for mixed-task agentic RL, including a unified trajectory representation, high-concurrency multi-framework rollout, decoupled control and data planes, and training-inference consistency. We open-source the training dynamics, RL environments, and RL framework to facilitate reproduction and further research on scaled RL and model self-improvement.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

MiMo-V2.6 is an omni-modal Mixture-of-Experts model family that scales reinforcement learning across larger batches, more diverse agentic environments and harnesses, and groupwise agentic grading to improve long-horizon agent performance. The report also releases MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B, RL environments, and an RL framework, with RL gains reported across coding, cybersecurity, general-agent, and visual-agent benchmarks.

Key findings

  • The MiMo-V2.6 series includes MiMo-V2.6-Pro, a 1.02T-parameter MoE model with 42B active parameters, and MiMo-V2.6-Flash, a 310B-parameter MoE model with 15B active parameters. RL training uses 1,568 prompts with group size 16, rolling out 25K sequences and 2.7–3.7B training tokens per step at context lengths up to 1M; RL post-training cost is $2.6M for Pro and $0.9M for Flash.
  • On DeepSWE v1.1, average@3 rises during RL from 58.4 to 72.6 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro and from 48.7 to 65.7 for MiMo-V2.6-Flash. Final reported scores include DeepSWE v1.1 71.9 for Pro and 67.9 for Flash, AutomationBench v1.0.6 53.1 and 52.3, MiMo Visual Coding 72.3 and 71.5, and CyberGym 94.0 and 95.1.
  • Multi-harness training improves DeepSWE v1.1 across four training mini-harnesses and three held-out harnesses, with held-out mean Pass@1 increasing from approximately 50% to 66%. Freezing the MoE router prevents load collapse: with a trainable router, CV rises from 0.78 to 2.0, peak load from 6× to 16×, and cold-expert fraction from 0.5% to 22%; the frozen-router run keeps CV ≈ 0.7, peak load ≈ 5.5×, and cold fraction near 1%.
  • The open-source MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B is trained on 77.4B total tokens, including 27.2B loss tokens. After domain-specific GRPO, SWE-bench Verified improves from 61.1 to 66.2, Terminal Bench 2.1 from 37.1 to 52.8, MiMo Visual Coding (mini) from 64.0 to 72.4, and MiMo Cyber Bench (mini) from 31.3 to 47.0; multi-harness RL improves all 21 dataset-harness pairs, with MiMo Code Bench (mini) gains of 1.8 to 9.3 percentage points across seven harnesses.

Methods

  • Architecture and training: MiMo-V2.6 uses a hybrid sparse MoE Transformer backbone interleaving Local Sliding Window Attention and Global Attention, plus MiMo-ViT, audio encoders, and a speculative decoder. Pre-training uses text-only then omni-modal stages: Flash is trained on 48T tokens (26T text, 22T omni) and Pro on 30T tokens (27T text, 3T omni), with context extended from 32K to 256K; mid-training extends context to 1M and switches hidden weights to the Muown optimizer with MXFP4 QAT.
  • RL setup: RL follows SFT and uses GRPO with asynchronous partial rollouts at staleness 4, a batch of 1,568 prompts with 16 rollouts each, and prompt-mean loss aggregation. Tasks span agentic and competitive coding (68%), general tool use (12%), aesthetic design (13%), context following (3%), and cybersecurity (4%).
  • Grading and infrastructure: The paper introduces Groupwise Reward Synthesis and Groupwise Advantage Redistribution for finer-grained rewards, multi-harness training with mini-harnesses, reward-hacking mitigation, a Harness Pool, Payload Porter, Sample Mixer, and training-inference consistency mechanisms including R3 routing replay and topp candidate-set replay. Evaluation uses public and internal benchmarks across code agent, cybersecurity, general agent, and visual agent categories.

Limitations

  • The paper does not state a dedicated limitations section. It reports RL failure analysis: infrastructure failures included GPU double-bit errors, a Kubernetes failure, an unreachable grader, rollout-length bias in Predictive Rollout Dispatch, GPU OOM from MoE imbalance where one expert-parallel rank received over 30× the mean token load, and CPU OOM during packing.
  • Evident from the text: reward hacking is mitigated but not eliminated; the logged confirmed-hack share remains below 2% throughout training for both models, and training-time auditing continues because the policy may discover new shortcuts.
  • Evident from the text: several evaluations rely on internal benchmarks such as MiMo Code Bench, MiMo Cyber Bench, and MiMo Visual Coding, and some baseline entries in the comparison table are missing, which limits external comparability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2610.11959

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

4 of 24 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Findingcitation
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    The gains from RL are not confined to a single domain, but hold consistently across diverse tasks spanning coding on DeepSWE, general workflows on AutomationBench, visual tasks on MiMo Visual Coding, and cybersecurity on MiMo Cyber Bench.

    “these gains are not confined to a single domain, but hold consistently across diverse tasks spanning coding on DeepSWE (Huang et al., 2026), general workflows on AutomationBench (Shepard and Salimans, 2026), visual tasks on MiMo Visual Coding, and cybersecurity on MiMo Cyber Bench.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Huang et al., 2026 source
    • cites Shepard and Salimans, 2026

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 34

    Terminal Bench 2.1 improves from 37.1 to 52.8.

    “Terminal Bench 2.1 (Merrill et al., 2026) improves from 37.1 to 52.8.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Merrill et al., 2026 source

      Section 2.2 (p. 3) describes Terminal-Bench 2.0, not 2.1. Searches for “Terminal-Bench 2.1,” “37.1,” and “52.8” found no passage in our copy reporting the claimed improvement. (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingcitation
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 34

    OfficeQA Pro improves from 19.5 to 24.8.

    “OfficeQA Pro (Opsahl-Ong et al., 2026) improves from 19.5 to 24.8”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Opsahl-Ong et al., 2026 source
  • Findingown data
    § 3.2 Mid-Training Setup · p. 7

    During our mid-training, we observe no loss spike throughout the training process.

    “during our mid-training, we observe no loss spike throughout the training process.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data
    § 4.1 Scaling RL Training Computation · p. 8

    For MiMo-V2.6-Pro, rollout consumes 43.8% and training 43.5%, while the grader takes the remaining 12.7% of compute.

    “rollout consumes 43.8% and training 43.5%, while the grader takes the remaining 12.7%.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 108
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 61
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 8
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation
    § 7.1 Distillation from MiMo-V2.6 · p. 33

    SWE-bench Pro increases from 32.0 to 44.6, and AutomationBench from 5.0% to 30.3%.

    “SWE-bench Pro (Deng et al., 2025) increases from 32.0 to 44.6, and AutomationBench from 5.0% to 30.3%.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Deng et al., 2025 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    MiMo-V2.6-Flash is a 310B-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model with 15B active parameters.

    “MiMo-V2.6-Flash, a 310B-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model with 15B active parameters”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.1 Scaling RL Training Computation · p. 8

    The average@3 score on DeepSWE rises steadily with cumulative cost for both models: MiMo-V2.6-Pro improves from 58.4 to 72.6 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash from 48.7 to 65.7.

    “The average@3 score on the DeepSWE benchmark (Huang and Jiang, 2026) rises steadily with cumulative cost for both models: over the course of RL, MiMo-V2.6-Pro improves from 58 . 4 to 72 . 6 and MiMo-V2.6-Flash from 48 . 7 to 65 . 7.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Huang and Jiang, 2026

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 4

    Experiments with MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B demonstrate consistent RL gains across diverse tasks and agent harnesses, validating the effectiveness and generality of the proposed suite.

    “Experiments with MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B demonstrate consistent RL gains across diverse tasks and agent harnesses, validating the effectiveness and generality of the proposed suite.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 2.2 MiMo-ViT · p. 4

    After pre-training on more than 4T image tokens, MiMo-ViT learns strong visual representations and serves as a robust foundation for MiMo-V2.6.

    “After pre-training on more than 4T image tokens, MiMo-ViT learns strong visual representations and serves as a robust foundation for MiMo-V2.6.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    Varying both the harness and the task improves the model generalization.

    “Varying both the harness and the task improves the model generalization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    Both MiMo-V2.6-Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Flash steadily improve their performance across the reported benchmarks as training steps increase.

    “both MiMo-V2.6-Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Flash steadily improve their performance across the reported benchmarks as training steps increase”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    MiMo-V2.6-Pro is a 1.02T-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model with 42B active parameters.

    “MiMo-V2.6-Pro, a 1.02T-parameter Mixture-of-Experts model with 42B active parameters”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 2.2 MiMo-ViT · p. 4

    MiMo-ViT's design substantially reduces the computational cost of high-resolution visual processing while achieving performance comparable to GA ViTs.

    “This design substantially reduces the computational cost of high-resolution visual processing while achieving performance comparable to GA ViTs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.1 Scaling RL Training Computation · p. 8

    RL post-training for MiMo-V2.6-Pro cost $2.6M and for MiMo-V2.6-Flash cost $0.9M.

    “spending $2.6M and $0.9M on RL post-training for MiMo-V2.6-Pro and MiMo-V2.6-Flash, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.3 RL Performance · p. 22

    Both Flash and Pro achieve overall improvements on DeepSWE v1.1, AutomationBench v1.0.6, and MiMo Visual Coding during RL training, despite fluctuations between checkpoints.

    “As shown in Figure 9, both Flash and Pro achieve overall improvements on DeepSWE v1.1, AutomationBench v1.0.6, and MiMo Visual Coding during RL training, despite fluctuations between checkpoints.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.4 Router Freezing for Stable RL · p. 23

    When the router is trainable, a severe load-collapse problem occurs: all three expert-load metrics rise monotonically over the first 20 steps, with CV increasing from 0.78 to 2.0, peak load from 6× to 16×, and the cold-expert fraction from 0.5% to 22%.

    “We observe a severe load-collapse problem when the router is trainable: all three metrics rise monotonically over the first 20 steps, with CV increasing from 0 . 78 to 2 . 0, peak load from 6 × to 16 × , and the cold-expert fraction from 0 . 5% to 22%.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.4 Router Freezing for Stable RL · p. 23

    Restoring the router parameters of the step-20 checkpoint to their initial pre-RL values while keeping all other parameters unchanged recovers load balance to near-initial levels while benchmark performance remains unchanged, indicating that the collapse is driven by router drift rather than by degradation of the expert weights.

    “To diagnose the cause, we restore the router parameters of the step-20 checkpoint to their initial pre-RL values while keeping all other parameters unchanged: load balance recovers to near-initial levels while benchmark performance remains unchanged, indicating that the collapse is driven by router drift rather than by degradation of the expert weights.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 4.2.2 General Agent Tasks · p. 12

    This process yields thousands of environments and diverse, verifiable tasks, which are combined with other tasks for RL training.

    “This process yields thousands of environments and diverse, verifiable tasks, which we combine with other tasks for RL training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.3.2 Groupwise Advantage Redistribution (GAR, Online Grading) · p. 18

    Policies trained with online grading tended to produce smaller, more precise patches that remained within the requested scope and were easier to maintain.

    “In contrast, policies trained with online grading tended to produce smaller, more precise patches that remained within the requested scope and were easier to maintain.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.2.6 Reward Hacking Mitigation · p. 15

    A dedicated hack agent uncovered many exploit paths that had not been observed during training and that existing cleanup procedures did not cover.

    “It uncovered many exploit paths that we had not observed during training and that our existing cleanup procedures did not cover.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.3 RL Performance · p. 22

    These gains generally accompany increasing total token counts, showing that stronger task performance develops alongside greater token usage.

    “These gains generally accompany increasing total token counts, showing that stronger task performance develops alongside greater token usage.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.3.2 Groupwise Advantage Redistribution (GAR, Online Grading) · p. 18

    With online grading, pass-rate gains are sustained through step 52, while turn counts remain roughly stable and token length grows gradually.

    “With online grading, pass-rate gains are sustained through step 52, while turn counts remain roughly stable and token length grows gradually.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 4.3.3 Behavioral Regularization · p. 19

    A group-relative length penalty improves generalization and curbs rapid growth in generated tokens during RL training.

    “We find that a group-relative length penalty improves generalization and curbs rapid growth in generated tokens during RL training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.3.2 Groupwise Advantage Redistribution (GAR, Online Grading) · p. 18

    Without online grading, turns and total token length grow rapidly, causing more trajectories to hit the length limit, making it difficult to sustain improvements in pass rate.

    “Without online grading, turns and total token length grow rapidly, causing more trajectories to hit the length limit, making it difficult to sustain improvements in pass rate.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § 5.5 RL Failure Analysis · p. 24

    Pro was restarted after the grader became unreachable over the network after step 14.

    “Pro was restarted after the grader became unreachable over the network after step 14.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 66.2 avg@3 on SWE-bench Verified, compared to 61.1 for SFT and 60.0 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| SWE-bench Verified | avg@3 | 60.0 | 61.1 | 66.2 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § 5.5 RL Failure Analysis · p. 24

    Flash was restarted after a Kubernetes failure caused pods in the Cyber-task cluster to crash between steps 15 and 16.

    “Flash was also restarted after a Kubernetes failure caused pods in the Cyber-task cluster to crash between steps 15 and 16.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 6.3 Sample Mixer : Stable Asynchronous Mixed-task RL · p. 30

    Deficit-corrected scheduling (α=0.5) improves occupancy stability over Deficit-based scheduling (α=0) and collection balance over Target-based scheduling (α=1) in this workload.

    “Deficit-corrected scheduling ( 𝛼 = 0 . 5) improves occupancy stability over Deficit-based scheduling ( 𝛼 = 0) and collection balance over Target-based scheduling ( 𝛼 = 1) in this workload.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 32

    In mixed-task RL evaluation, block-6 improves global average throughput by approximately 6% over block-8, with little change in average accepted length.

    “in mixed-task RL evaluation, block-6 improves global average throughput by approximately 6% over block-8, with little change in average accepted length.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning
    § 5.5 RL Failure Analysis · p. 24

    Driver failures occurred during packing late in Flash as longer sequences increased per-node data volume beyond host-memory capacity.

    “Driver failures occurred during packing late in Flash as longer sequences increased per-node data volume beyond host-memory capacity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.6 Broadening Capabilities via MOPD2 · p. 25

    The MiMo-V2.6 series delivers substantial improvements over MiMo-V2.5, achieving performance comparable to that of frontier models across various domains.

    “The MiMo-V2.6 series delivers substantial improvements over MiMo-V2.5, achieving performance comparable to that of frontier models across various domains.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 59.9 avg@3 on MiMo Code Bench (mini), compared to 51.6 for SFT and 19.5 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| MiMo Code Bench (mini) | avg@3 | 19.5 | 51.6 | 59.9 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 52.8 avg@1 on Terminal Bench 2.1, compared to 37.1 for SFT and 27.0 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| Terminal Bench 2.1 | avg@1 | 27.0 | 37.1 | 52.8 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 47.0 avg@3 on MiMo Cyber Bench (mini), compared to 31.3 for SFT and 5.7 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| MiMo Cyber Bench (mini) | avg@3 | 5.7 | 31.3 | 47.0 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 31

    At a typical topp of 0.97, a candidate set averages fewer than five tokens.

    “at a typical topp of 0.97, a candidate set averages fewer than five tokens.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 38.0 avg@1 on Toolathlon-Verified, compared to 35.2 for SFT and 25.9 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| Toolathlon-Verified | avg@1 | 25.9 | 35.2 | 38.0 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 34

    The four training sets contain approximately 7k tasks in total, with the general-domain set focusing on knowledge work.

    “The four training sets contain approximately 7k tasks in total, with the general-domain set focusing on knowledge work.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.4 Router Freezing for Stable RL · p. 23

    Freezing the router for RL training keeps all three expert-load statistics flat (CV ≈ 0.7, peak load ≈ 5.5×, cold fraction near 1%) with benchmark performance growing normally.

    “We therefore freeze the router for RL training; the frozen-router run keeps all three statistics flat (CV ≈ 0 . 7, peak load ≈ 5 . 5 × , cold fraction near 1%) with benchmark performance growing normally.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 34

    The training resources additionally include approximately 1k music-generation tasks, which support the GRPO experiments reported below.

    “The training resources additionally include approximately 1k music-generation tasks, which support the GRPO experiments reported below.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 47.6 avg@3 on SWE-bench Pro, compared to 44.6 for SFT and 32.0 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| SWE-bench Pro | avg@3 | 32.0 | 44.6 | 47.6 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.5 RL Failure Analysis · p. 24

    Training failures were GPU out-of-memory (OOM) errors from MoE imbalance within a micro-batch: at one layer, an expert-parallel (EP) rank received over 30× the mean token load despite a relatively balanced full batch.

    “Training failures were GPU out-of-memory (OOM) errors from MoE imbalance within a micro-batch: at one layer, an expert-parallel (EP) rank received over 30 × the mean token load despite a relatively balanced full batch.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 6.3 Sample Mixer : Stable Asynchronous Mixed-task RL · p. 29

    Across 25 profiled data sources, the mean generated tokens and the active rollout duration vary by 90× and 66×, respectively.

    “Across 25 profiled data sources, the mean generated tokens and the active rollout duration vary by 90 × and 66 × , respectively (Figure 15), motivating scheduling that adapts to each source's workload.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 5.5 RL Failure Analysis · p. 24

    Although packing was distributed across nodes, local memory demand still caused CPU OOM and interrupted the run.

    “Although packing was distributed across nodes (§6.2), local memory demand still caused CPU OOM and interrupted the run.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § 5.5 RL Failure Analysis · p. 24

    Infrastructure failures were primarily GPU-memory double-bit errors (DBEs).

    “Infrastructure failures were primarily GPU-memory double-bit errors (DBEs).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 33.1 avg@1 on AutomationBench v1.0.6, compared to 30.3 for SFT and 5.0 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| AutomationBench v1.0.6 | avg@1 | 5.0 | 30.3 | 33.1 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5.5 RL Failure Analysis · p. 24

    Rollout failures arose in the partial-rollout setting: shorter rollouts completed first after startup, biasing length estimates in Predictive Rollout Dispatch and exhausting both the GPU and pinned host-memory KV pools.

    “Rollout failures arose in the partial-rollout setting: shorter rollouts completed first after startup, biasing length estimates in Predictive Rollout Dispatch (§6.3) and exhausting both the GPU and pinned host-memory KV pools.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 31

    Both R3 and topp candidate-set replay incur negligible overhead, as the payloads stay compact and move off the critical path.

    “Both R3 and topp candidate-set replay incur negligible overhead, as the payloads stay compact and move off the critical path.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 34

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B improves on Qwen3.5-9B in all 21 dataset-harness pairs, and multi-harness RL further improves every pair.

    “MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B improves on Qwen3.5-9B in all 21 datasetharness pairs, and multi-harness RL further improves every pair.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.1 Distillation from MiMo-V2.6 · p. 33

    The mixture contains 77.4 billion total tokens, including 27.2 billion loss tokens that contribute to the SFT objective.

    “The mixture contains 77.4 billion total tokens, including 27.2 billion loss tokens that contribute to the SFT objective.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 36

    The HR management interface in (c) suffers from clear layout issues.

    “Notably, the HR management interface in (c) suffers from clear layout issues.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 72.4 avg@1 on MiMo Visual Coding (mini), compared to 64.0 for SFT and 61.7 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| MiMo Visual Coding (mini) | avg@1 | 61.7 | 64.0 | 72.4 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    + Multi-Harness RL achieves a mean of 59.0 on MiMo Code Bench (mini), compared to 53.1 for MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B and 15.3 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| Qwen3.5-9B | 19.0 | 7.5 | 16.5 | 22.5 | 10.5 | 13.5 | 17.5 | 15.3 |”
    • Also stated in: § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35 · plain
      “| MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B | 53.2 | 56.7 | 51.5 | 56.3 | 46.0 | 51.2 | 56.8 | 53.1 |”
    • Also stated in: § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35 · plain
      “| + Multi-Harness RL | 62.5 | 64.5 | 57.0 | 63.3 | 50.7 | 53.0 | 62.0 | 59.0 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 36

    After distillation, MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (SFT) generates websites with noticeably richer content, more harmonious color palettes, and more effective incorporation of image assets.

    “After distillation, MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (SFT) (middle column) generates websites with noticeably richer content, more harmonious color palettes, and more effective incorporation of image assets”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 8 Conclusion · p. 37

    RL gains are consistent across domains and harnesses.

    “Consistent RL gains across domains and harnesses highlight the value of these resources as a shared foundation for further experimentation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 24.8 avg@1 on OfficeQA Pro, compared to 19.5 for SFT and 9.0 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| OfficeQA Pro | avg@1 | 9.0 | 19.5 | 24.8 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    + Multi-Harness RL achieves a mean of 65.7 on SWE-bench Verified, compared to 62.3 for MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B and 53.1 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| Qwen3.5-9B | 58.4 | 36.4 | 54.8 | 57.8 | 48.6 | 54.8 | 60.6 | 53.1 |”
    • Also stated in: § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35 · plain
      “| MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B | 61.7 | 63.9 | 61.7 | 63.1 | 58.5 | 61.7 | 65.3 | 62.3 |”
    • Also stated in: § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35 · plain
      “| + Multi-Harness RL | 67.9 | 65.1 | 66.6 | 67.2 | 61.1 | 65.3 | 66.7 | 65.7 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    Websites produced by Qwen3.5-9B appear relatively plain in visual design, with simplistic layouts and minimal use of imagery.

    “As shown in the left column, websites produced by Qwen3.5-9B appear relatively plain in visual design, with simplistic layouts”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    + Multi-Harness RL achieves a mean of 46.5 on SWE-bench Pro, compared to 44.4 for MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B and 27.5 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| Qwen3.5-9B | 33.5 | 15.2 | 31.1 | 31.1 | 23.1 | 26.9 | 31.6 | 27.5 |”
    • Also stated in: § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35 · plain
      “| MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B | 45.2 | 46.6 | 45.1 | 45.5 | 40.3 | 42.2 | 45.6 | 44.4 |”
    • Also stated in: § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35 · plain
      “| + Multi-Harness RL | 48.5 | 46.9 | 47.6 | 48.0 | 42.6 | 43.1 | 48.4 | 46.5 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 70.6 avg@1 on MiMo General Bench (mini), compared to 62.2 for SFT and 28.5 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| MiMo General Bench (mini) | avg@1 | 28.5 | 62.2 | 70.6 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 35

    MiMo-V2.6-Distill-Qwen-9B (RL) achieves 25.2 avg@1 on JobBench, compared to 18.3 for SFT and 2.6 for Qwen3.5-9B.

    “| JobBench | avg@1 | 2.6 | 18.3 | 25.2 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 3.2 Mid-Training Setup · p. 7

    Prior work reports that switching an Adam-pre-trained model to Muon training can cause optimizer mismatch and degraded performance.

    “Prior work reports that switching an Adam-pre-trained model to Muon training can cause optimizer mismatch and degraded performance (Qu et al., 2026).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Qu et al., 2026

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    Scaling RL compute substantially unlocks model potential on both verifiable tasks such as coding and less verifiable tasks such as web development.

    “Scaling RL compute substantially unlocks model potential on both verifiable tasks such as coding and less verifiable tasks such as web development.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    MiMo-V2.6 is capable of stronger complex problem solving and more reliable performance in daily co-work scenarios, reflecting more general agentic intelligence.

    “These gains indicate that MiMo-V2.6 is capable of stronger complex problem solving and more reliable performance in daily co-work scenarios, reflecting more general agentic intelligence.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 3.2 Mid-Training Setup · p. 7

    Muon's matrix-based update retains stronger data efficiency beyond the critical-batch-size regime, making Muon particularly attractive for large-batch training.

    “This matrix-based update retains stronger data efficiency beyond the critical-batch-size regime, making Muon particularly attractive for large-batch training (Liu et al., 2025b; Shah et al., 2025).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Liu et al., 2025b

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Shah et al., 2025

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § 3.2 Mid-Training Setup · p. 7

    MXFP4 quantization-aware training during mid-training allows the model to adapt to low-precision computation while preserving model quality.

    “We employ MXFP4 quantization-aware training (QAT) during mid-training, allowing the model to adapt to low-precision computation while preserving model quality.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.1 Scaling RL Training Computation · p. 8

    A large batch is good for scaling out GPUs: rollout parallelizes over sequences and training shards the batch across data-parallel ranks, so throughput grows with the GPU count.

    “A large batch is good for scaling out GPUs: rollout parallelizes over sequences and training shards the batch across data-parallel ranks, so throughput grows with the GPU count.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § 2.2 MiMo-ViT · p. 4

    MiMo-ViT's sink-augmented SWA enables information exchange across window boundaries over successive layers and mitigates visual fragmentation.

    “It replaces fixed, non-overlapping window attention in MiMo-VL-7B (Yue et al., 2025) with sink-augmented SWA, enabling information exchange across window boundaries over successive layers and mitigating visual fragmentation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Yue et al., 2025

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 3.2 Mid-Training Setup · p. 7

    Muown augments Muon with explicit row-norm control, mitigating spectral-norm drift and reducing sensitivity to weight decay at negligible overhead.

    “Muown augments Muon with explicit row-norm control, mitigating spectral-norm drift and reducing sensitivity to weight decay at negligible overhead (Lion et al., 2026).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lion et al., 2026

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § 3.2 Mid-Training Setup · p. 7

    Muon leverages the matrix structure of hidden weights by orthogonalizing their updates.

    “Muon leverages the matrix structure of hidden weights by orthogonalizing their updates (Jordan et al., 2024).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Jordan et al., 2024

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 9

    Executable evaluation alone does not guarantee reliable supervision: tests may overlook required behavior, reject valid implementations, or yield inconsistent outcomes across executions.

    “However, executable evaluation alone does not guarantee reliable supervision: tests may overlook required behavior, reject valid implementations, or yield inconsistent outcomes across executions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data
    § 4.2.6 Reward Hacking Mitigation · p. 15

    Iterative hack-agent screening continued until the hack agent could no longer find a successful exploit in any of the environments.

    “We continued this process until the hack agent could no longer find a successful exploit in any of the environments.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.2.4 Cybersecurity Agent Tasks · p. 13

    The difficulty in vulnerability reproduction is not triggering a crash, since complex C/C++ projects expose dozens of reachable crash paths, but triggering the specific vulnerability described.

    “The difficulty is not triggering a crash, since complex C/C++ projects expose dozens of reachable crash paths, but triggering the specific vulnerability described.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Complex C/C++ projects expose dozens of reachable crash paths.
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § 4.2.5 Multi-Harness Training · p. 13

    Production harness modules are tightly coupled rather than independently configurable, so one cannot vary a single interaction mechanism in isolation or assemble diversity by controlled recombination.

    “Second, their modules are tightly coupled rather than independently configurable, so one cannot vary a single interaction mechanism in isolation or assemble diversity by controlled recombination.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.2.3 Visual Agent Tasks · p. 12

    The diversity of valid creative solutions makes aesthetic quality difficult to capture through fixed rules alone; therefore the paper combines pointwise and groupwise grading to establish consistent quality standards while rewarding relative improvements in aesthetic quality.

    “The diversity of valid creative solutions makes aesthetic quality difficult to capture through fixed rules alone. We therefore combine pointwise and groupwise grading to establish consistent quality standards while rewarding relative improvements in aesthetic quality.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 4.2.6 Reward Hacking Mitigation · p. 14

    These safeguards are accompanied by explicit instructions against retrieving existing solutions or bypassing the required implementation.

    “These safeguards are accompanied by explicit instructions against retrieving existing solutions or bypassing the required implementation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.3 Behavioral Regularization · p. 19

    The group-relative length penalty encourages concise successful solutions using a reference adapted to each prompt, while the pass-rate gate preserves room for exploration on difficult prompts.

    “This encourages concise successful solutions using a reference adapted to each prompt, while the pass-rate gate preserves room for exploration on difficult prompts.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning
    § 4.2.6 Reward Hacking Mitigation · p. 14

    Building a project with the reference patch applied during environment construction can leave behind artifacts that reveal the solution.

    “Building a project with the reference patch applied during environment construction can leave behind artifacts that reveal the solution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.3 Behavioral Regularization · p. 20

    Each sign's total advantage mass is conserved when neither scale is clipped, limiting excess negative pressure that can drive uncontrolled entropy growth.

    “Each sign's total advantage mass is conserved when neither scale is clipped, limiting excess negative pressure that can drive uncontrolled entropy growth.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    Aligning training and inference engines on MoE routing and topp sampling candidate sets supports stable RL training.

    “We align the training and inference engines on MoE routing and topp sampling candidate sets, and optimize both engines for RL workloads.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.3 Behavioral Regularization · p. 20

    Removed positive advantage is redistributed to unflagged positive tokens, while added negative magnitude is offset by reducing penalties on unflagged negative tokens: behavior without detected errors receives more reinforcement or less punishment, depending on the trajectory's sign.

    “Removed positive advantage is redistributed to unflagged positive tokens, while added negative magnitude is offset by reducing penalties on unflagged negative tokens: behavior without detected errors receives more reinforcement or less punishment, depending on the trajectory's sign.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.3 Behavioral Regularization · p. 20

    If a denominator is zero, its scale is set to one; conservation is not guaranteed in this case or when clipping occurs.

    “If a denominator is zero, its scale is set to one; conservation is not guaranteed in this case or when clipping occurs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 10

    Disagreements between the auditor's assessment and observed reward identify tasks requiring further review and provide concrete evidence of possible mismatches between intended behavior and implemented verification.

    “These disagreements identify tasks requiring further review and provide concrete evidence of possible mismatches between the intended behavior and the implemented verification.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    A sample mixing mechanism, working with dynamic sampling and partial rollout, stabilizes per-task sample composition in train batches.

    “A sample mixing mechanism, working together with dynamic sampling and partial rollout, stabilizes per-task sample composition in train batches.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.1 Groupwise Reward Synthesis (GRS, Offline Rubrics) · p. 17

    Failed trajectories retain zero reward, while passing trajectories are further distinguished by implementation quality and problem-solving behavior.

    “Failed trajectories retain zero reward, while passing trajectories are further distinguished by implementation quality and problem-solving behavior.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.2 General Agent Tasks · p. 12

    The paper's general-agent environment design balances realism with large-scale RL requirements: files, software behavior, and underlying data reflect professional practice, while execution remains local and environments are easy to reset.

    “Our design balances realism with the requirements of large-scale RL: files, software behavior, and underlying data should reflect professional practice, while execution must remain local and environments must be easy to reset.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 4.2.4 Cybersecurity Agent Tasks · p. 13

    Fix-binary differential testing, as used in CyberGym (Wang et al., 2025), accepts a PoC that crashes the vulnerable binary but not the patched one; an incomplete patch rejects correct PoCs, and unrelated changes between the two commits flip verdicts for reasons unconnected to the bug.

    “Fix-binary differential testing, as used in CyberGym (Wang et al., 2025), accepts a PoC that crashes the vulnerable binary but not the patched one; an incomplete patch rejects correct PoCs, and unrelated changes between the two commits flip verdicts for reasons unconnected to the bug.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wang et al., 2025

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 4.3.2 Groupwise Advantage Redistribution (GAR, Online Grading) · p. 18

    These workarounds aim to increase the likelihood of passing test but can exceed the scope of the task instructions, expand APIs unnecessarily, obscure failures, and make the code harder to maintain.

    “These workarounds aim to increase the likelihood of passing test but can exceed the scope of the task instructions, expand APIs unnecessarily, obscure failures, and make the code harder to maintain.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisereasoning
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    Realizing recursive self-improvement requires agents that couple models with interactive environments and supply multi-step trajectories and feedback signals.

    “Realizing this vision requires agents, which couple models with interactive environments and thereby supply the multi-step trajectories and feedback signals that self-improvement depends on.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: RL is the central training paradigm for advancing large foundation models towards self-improvement.
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 4.2.5 Multi-Harness Training · p. 13

    Agent harnesses differ in module design and are selected or built to meet different application needs; models must therefore adapt to diverse interaction mechanisms, including those of harnesses unseen during training, making cross-harness generalization an important capability.

    “Agent harnesses differ in module design and are selected or built to meet different application needs. Models must therefore adapt to diverse interaction mechanisms, including those of harnesses unseen during training, making cross-harness generalization an important capability.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.4 Cybersecurity Agent Tasks · p. 13

    The paper extracts two attributes from the ground-truth sanitizer report: the vulnerability type and the crash location (the topmost project-level stack frame). A PoC is accepted iff its crash matches both under rule-based string matching, which is deterministic, reproducible, and computationally trivial.

    “We instead extract two attributes from the ground-truth sanitizer (ASan/MSan/UBSan) report: the vulnerability type (e.g., heap-buffer-overflow) and the crash location (the topmost project-level stack frame). A PoC is accepted iff its crash matches both under rule-based string matching, which is deterministic, reproducible, and computationally trivial.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 11

    The paper reuses the previous rollout pipeline to collect agent trajectories to investigate potential reward hacking, and the submitted patches and conversation logs provide evidence of how agents obtained their rewards, helping identify unintended shortcuts or exploitation.

    “We also reuse the previous rollout pipeline to collect agent trajectories to investigate potential reward hacking. The submitted patches and conversation logs provide evidence of how agents obtained their rewards, helping identify unintended shortcuts or exploitation of the environment and evaluation process.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.2.4 Cybersecurity Agent Tasks · p. 13

    Providing the compiled harness binary mirrors real vulnerability analysis, where a researcher runs the target under a debugger, inspects memory, and crafts mutations from runtime observations.

    “providing it mirrors real vulnerability analysis, where a researcher runs the target under a debugger, inspects memory, and crafts mutations from runtime observations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 4.2 Scaling RL Environments and Harnesses · p. 9

    Meeting the requirements for diverse RL environments jointly is challenging because realistic workflows involve heterogeneous tools and complex state, while automated graders may be incomplete, inconsistent, or vulnerable to exploitation.

    “Meeting these requirements jointly is challenging: realistic workflows involve heterogeneous tools and complex state, while automated graders may be incomplete, inconsistent, or vulnerable to exploitation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 4.2.5 Multi-Harness Training · p. 13

    Production harnesses wrap the agent loop with engineering safeguards and multi-step workflows, and steer the model with numerous constraint and instruction prompts; these extras fall outside the task-completion reward signal, making credit assignment unreliable and leaving reward-unmeasured requirements ignored.

    “First, production harnesses wrap the agent loop with engineering safeguards and multi-step workflows, and steer the model with numerous constraint and instruction prompts. These extras fall outside the task-completion reward signal, making credit assignment unreliable and leaving reward-unmeasured requirements to simply be ignored.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 4.2.2 General Agent Tasks · p. 12

    In general-agent task synthesis, task completion is evaluated using atomic, binary rubric items: code-based checks verify deterministic properties, while LLM-based checks assess more open-ended content; for LLM-based items, agreement across repeated judgments by the same model and across different judge models helps identify ambiguity.

    “Task completion is evaluated using atomic, binary rubric items: code-based checks verify deterministic properties, such as database values and deliverable formats, while LLM-based checks assess more open-ended content. For LLM-based items, agreement across repeated judgments by the same model and across different judge models helps identify ambiguity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.2.4 Cybersecurity Agent Tasks · p. 13

    Verification for vulnerability reproduction must separate the intended bug from unrelated crashes, and because it doubles as the RL reward, it must be accurate, deterministic, and cheap.

    “Verification must therefore separate the intended bug from unrelated crashes, and because it doubles as the RL reward, it must be accurate, deterministic, and cheap.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 3.2 Mid-Training Setup · p. 7

    Mid-training bridges the general foundation and subsequent large-scale RL by further developing the model's agentic abilities, extending long-context support, and adapting the optimization setup for large-batch training.

    “Mid-training bridges this general foundation and subsequent large-scale RL by further developing the model's agentic abilities, extending long-context support, and adapting the optimization setup for large-batch training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.2.5 Multi-Harness Training · p. 13

    Training exclusively within a single harness may couple task-solving strategies to harness-specific implementations and limit transfer.

    “Training exclusively within a single harness may couple task-solving strategies to harness-specific implementations and limiting transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § Abstract · p. 1

    Freezing the MoE router and establishing a multi-layer defense against reward hacking keeps training stable at scale.

    “To keep training stable at scale, we freeze the MoE router and establish a multi-layer defense against reward hacking.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § 4.2.6 Reward Hacking Mitigation · p. 14

    In coding tasks, agents may pass tests by recovering leaked solutions from the environment or retrieving existing solutions over the network.

    “In coding tasks, agents may pass tests by recovering leaked solutions from the environment or retrieving existing solutions over the network.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 9

    Coding tasks are particularly well suited to RL, as candidate solutions can be executed and evaluated through automated tests, providing feedback at scale.

    “Coding tasks are particularly well suited to RL, as candidate solutions can be executed and evaluated through automated tests, providing feedback at scale.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.1 Groupwise Reward Synthesis (GRS, Offline Rubrics) · p. 17

    A choice made by one successful solution does not automatically become a requirement for all others.

    “At the same time, a choice made by one successful solution does not automatically become a requirement for all others.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    A unified trajectory representation and a penalty mechanism together refine the learning signal.

    “we design a unified trajectory representation and a penalty mechanism that together refine the learning signal.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.6 Reward Hacking Mitigation · p. 14

    The paper removes build logs, verifier outputs, residual patches, and project-generated binaries or bytecode that could expose the solution; cleans caches that may contain solution information; retains Git history up to and including the base commit, removing later commits and their associated references; and enforces container-level network isolation to restrict access to upstream fixes and other

    “We therefore remove build logs, verifier outputs, residual patches, and projectgenerated binaries or bytecode that could expose it. We also clean caches that may contain solution information, including those outside the repository, while preserving third-party dependencies needed for offline rebuilding. For every task, we retain Git history up to and including the base commit, removing later”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.4 Cybersecurity Agent Tasks · p. 13

    The task description is derived from the same sanitizer report, stating the exact type and function in which the crash must occur, so description and verification share a single source of truth; CyberGym's LLM-generated descriptions, by contrast, are often too broad or simply wrong.

    “The task description is derived from the same report, stating the exact type and function in which the crash must occur, so description and verification share a single source of truth; CyberGym's LLM-generated descriptions, by contrast, are often too broad (e.g., 'buffer overflow in libxml2') or simply wrong.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 11

    For tasks with a reference patch, the paper ensures fail-to-pass tests fail and pass-to-pass tests pass before applying the reference patch, and both pass after the patch; these outcomes must remain stable across eight reruns, screening for flaky tests and environment-induced reward fluctuations.

    “For those tasks with reference patch, we ensure fail-to-pass (F2P) tests must fail and pass-to-pass (P2P) tests must pass before applying the reference patch; after the patch, both must pass. We require these outcomes to remain stable across eight reruns, screening for flaky tests and environment-induced reward fluctuations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 4.2.5 Multi-Harness Training · p. 14

    The paper proposes multi-harness training with mini-harnesses that all start from the same minimal agent loop including system prompt, tools, and context management; these modules stay minimal and decoupled, so implementations can be freely recombined and harness expansion remains controllable, safe, and clean.

    “we propose multi-harness training with carefully designed mini-harnesses. All miniharnesses start from the same minimal agent loop, which already includes the components needed for task completion-system prompt, tools, and context management. These modules stay minimal and decoupled, so implementations can be freely recombined and harness expansion remains controllable, safe, and clean.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.2 General Agent Tasks · p. 12

    Consistency alone does not establish that rubrics capture task completion; therefore the paper collects rollouts from models with different capability levels and has a review agent examine trajectories, execution results, and rubric judgments, revising overly restrictive and overly permissive criteria.

    “Consistency alone does not establish that rubrics capture task completion. We therefore collect rollouts from models with different capability levels and have a review agent examine their trajectories, execution results, and rubric judgments. The reviewer revises overly restrictive criteria that reject valid solutions and overly permissive criteria that accept incomplete ones.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.2 General Agent Tasks · p. 12

    To test resistance to reward hacking, the paper includes negative checks for unintended changes to unrelated files or databases and constructs adversarial solutions that appear correct without actually solving the task.

    “To test resistance to reward hacking, we include negative checks for unintended changes to unrelated files or databases and construct adversarial solutions that appear correct without actually solving the task.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 4.2.2 General Agent Tasks · p. 12

    During RL, a self-hosted MiMo-V2.6-SFT model serves as the grader to support stable scoring.

    “During RL, a self-hosted MiMo-V2.6-SFT model serves as the grader to support stable scoring.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.3 Behavioral Regularization · p. 20

    The segment-level behavioral penalties mask flagged tokens in positive trajectories and penalize them more strongly in negative trajectories.

    “This masks flagged tokens in positive trajectories and penalizes them more strongly in negative trajectories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 4.1 Scaling RL Training Computation · p. 8

    A Sample Mixer ensures efficient and stable training batch distribution given various rollout durations and pass rates of different tasks.

    “In multi-task RL, we implement a Sample Mixer to ensure efficient and stable training batch distribution given various rollout durations and pass rates of different tasks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.2 General Agent Tasks · p. 12

    All state in general-agent environments is stored locally, and each rollout runs in an isolated sandbox that can be restored to a fixed initial state, avoiding network variability and service limits while supporting reproducible execution.

    “All state is stored locally, and each rollout runs in an isolated sandbox that can be restored to a fixed initial state. This avoids network variability and service limits while supporting reproducible execution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 11

    Together, these procedures support the construction of a diverse coding-task corpus under a consistent standard of supervision quality; specification-test alignment targets fidelity of the reward signal, repeated execution checks its stability, and rollout-based auditing probes whether it agrees with an independent assessment of solution correctness.

    “Together, these procedures support the construction of a diverse coding-task corpus under a consistent standard of supervision quality. Specification-test alignment targets the fidelity of the reward signal, repeated execution checks its stability, and rollout-based auditing probes whether it agrees with an independent assessment of solution correctness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    An agent-centric mid-training phase expands the exploration space for agentic tasks, enabling the model to discover more effective task-solving trajectories during post-training.

    “We further introduce an agent-centric mid-training phase that expands the exploration space for agentic tasks, enabling the model to discover more effective task-solving trajectories during post-training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § 4.2 Scaling RL Environments and Harnesses · p. 9

    Scaling agentic RL requires diverse environments that reflect real-world tasks, support reproducible execution at training scale, and provide rewards aligned with task objectives.

    “Scaling agentic RL requires diverse environments that reflect real-world tasks, support reproducible execution at training scale, and provide rewards aligned with task objectives.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.2 Groupwise Advantage Redistribution (GAR, Online Grading) · p. 18

    The uncapped update preserves the sum of advantages over passing trajectories and the quality-induced relative weights without altering failed trajectories.

    “This uncapped update preserves 𝑖 ∈P 𝐴 ′ 𝑖 = 𝑖 ∈P 𝐴𝑖 and the quality-induced relative weights without altering failed trajectories.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 9

    The central challenge is to scale task construction while ensuring that rewards faithfully reflect task correctness.

    “The central challenge is therefore to scale task construction while ensuring that rewards faithfully reflect task correctness.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.3.2 Groupwise Advantage Redistribution (GAR, Online Grading) · p. 18

    Simply downweighting positive advantages leaves negative advantages unchanged; renormalization restores their balance as a safeguard against excessive entropy growth.

    “Simply downweighting positive advantages leaves negative advantages unchanged; renormalization restores their balance as a safeguard against excessive entropy growth.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 4.2.1 Code Agent Tasks · p. 10

    Inspection alone may miss discrepancies between specifications and tests, so the paper assesses their alignment through rollout-based auditing.

    “As inspection alone may miss discrepancies between specifications and tests, we further assess their alignment through rollout-based auditing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1 Introduction · p. 3

    Scaling RL on complex agentic tasks opens a concrete path to recursive self-improvement.

    “Towards this goal, scaling reinforcement learning (RL) on complex agentic tasks thus opens a concrete path.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: RL is the central training paradigm for advancing large foundation models towards self-improvement.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 5.3 RL Performance · p. 22

    The gap between the mean performance on training and held-out harnesses narrows, providing evidence that the learned coding capabilities transfer across harness implementations.

    “The gap between the mean performance on training and held-out harnesses also narrows, providing evidence that the learned coding capabilities transfer across harness implementations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 4.2.5 Multi-Harness Training · p. 14

    The paper derives diverse, task-adapted mini-harness configurations for Code, General, Visual, and Cyber; the resulting training distribution is diverse yet controllable, supporting analysis of individual harness mechanisms and encouraging transferable task-solving strategies.

    “We then derive diverse, task-adapted mini-harness configurations for Code, General, Visual, and Cyber. The resulting training distribution is diverse yet controllable, supporting analysis of individual harness mechanisms and encouraging transferable task-solving strategies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § 5.6 Broadening Capabilities via MOPD2 · p. 25

    MOPD2 extends the capabilities of the RL-trained model to domains where reliable training-time verification is challenging, including those with complex environments or verifiers that are difficult to design, such as long-horizon game development, scientific research, and embodied intelligence.

    “MOPD2further extends the capabilities of the RL-trained model to domains where reliable trainingtime verification is challenging, including those with complex environments or verifiers that are difficult to design, such as long-horizon game development, scientific research, and embodied intelligence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Reliable training-time verification is challenging for domains with complex environments or verifiers that are difficult to design.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 31

    The fixed shape of the topp bitmap avoids a GPU-CPU synchronization; the full width never truncates even a set that spans the whole vocabulary.

    “The fixed shape avoids a GPU-CPU synchronization; the full width never truncates even a set that spans the whole vocabulary.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 7 Open Foundations for Agentic RL · p. 33

    Our experiments show substantial gains across multiple domains, demonstrating the value of these resources for RL training.

    “Our experiments show substantial gains across multiple domains, demonstrating the value of these resources for RL training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 32

    HBM is thereby devoted to running requests as far as possible: the larger the decode batch, the higher the arithmetic intensity and compute utilization.

    “HBM is thereby devoted to running requests as far as possible: the larger the decode batch, the higher the arithmetic intensity and compute utilization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 5.1 Training Setup · p. 20

    Freezing the router during RL training maintains stable expert loads.

    “During RL training, we freeze the router to maintain stable expert loads.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 31

    The quantization follows the numeric constraints of the MXFP4 Humming GEMM kernels used during rollout, so the two engines see identical expert weights.

    “The quantization follows the numeric constraints of the MXFP4 Humming GEMM kernels (vLLM Project, 2026) used during rollout, so the two engines see identical expert weights.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites vLLM Project, 2026

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 6.2 Harness Pool and Payload Porter : Large-Batch RL with Multiple Harnesses · p. 29

    This limits redundant payload movement while accommodating uneven multi-modal workloads.

    “This limits redundant payload movement while accommodating uneven multi-modal workloads.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 5.1 Training Setup · p. 20

    Prompt-mean aggregation prevents response length from growing too quickly during RL.

    “For loss aggregation we use prompt-mean aggregation, which averages the surrogate at the prompt level rather than over all response tokens; this prevents response length from growing too quickly during RL.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 6.2 Harness Pool and Payload Porter : Large-Batch RL with Multiple Harnesses · p. 28

    This avoids full-batch aggregation on the driver and dense padded intermediates during packing.

    “This avoids full-batch aggregation on the driver and dense padded intermediates during packing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 34

    These results highlight the value of high-quality training data and a strong SFT initialization for further improvement through RL.

    “These results highlight the value of high-quality training data and a strong SFT initialization for further improvement through RL.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 5.1 Training Setup · p. 20

    Carrying over FP32 master weights and Muown's row state from the SFT checkpoint stabilizes MXFP4 training.

    “To stabilize MXFP4 training, we initialize RL by carrying over the FP32 master weights and Muown's row state from the SFT checkpoint.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 5.6 Broadening Capabilities via MOPD2 · p. 25

    Demonstrations supply the context, while the student generates its own continuation rather than imitating a fixed response.

    “Demonstrations supply the context, while the student generates its own continuation rather than imitating a fixed response.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 6.3 Sample Mixer : Stable Asynchronous Mixed-task RL · p. 31

    Restricting replay to the first collection step reduces the wait for slow sources while preserving the specified training distribution.

    “Restricting replay to the first collection step reduces the wait for slow sources while preserving the specified training distribution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 31

    We maintain alignment between the two engines in mixture-of-experts (MoE) routing and probability normalization.

    “We maintain alignment between the two engines in mixture-of-experts (MoE) routing and probability normalization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 34

    These evaluation sets follow the same task distributions as their corresponding training sets.

    “These evaluation sets follow the same task distributions as their corresponding training sets.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 6.2 Harness Pool and Payload Porter : Large-Batch RL with Multiple Harnesses · p. 28

    This amortizes process and service overhead across concurrent rollouts, supporting larger concurrent batches without a proportional increase in actor count.

    “This amortizes process and service overhead across concurrent rollouts, supporting larger concurrent batches without a proportional increase in actor count.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning
    § 5.1 Training Setup · p. 20

    Tuning importance sampling bounds based on policy entropy pulls entropy back to the normal range.

    “Positive and negative bounds are both initialized to [ 0 . 2 , 5 . 0 ] and tuned independently at runtime based on policy entropy: when entropy is too low, we widen the positive bounds and narrow the negative ones to pull entropy back to the normal range, and we do the opposite when entropy is too high.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 6.3 Sample Mixer : Stable Asynchronous Mixed-task RL · p. 30

    We bound this expectation by the max running requests used for CUDA graph capture, limiting queueing delays that prolong rollout lifetimes and increase staleness.

    “We bound this expectation by the max running requests used for CUDA graph capture, limiting queueing delays that prolong rollout lifetimes and increase staleness.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 31

    We record each token's candidate set during rollout and renormalize the training log-probabilities within it, matching the sampler's normalization.

    “we record each token's candidate set during rollout (Liu et al., 2025a; The Microsoft AI Team, 2026) and renormalize the training log-probabilities within it, matching the sampler's normalization.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Liu et al., 2025a

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites The Microsoft AI Team, 2026

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 32

    Offloading and restoration run on side CUDA streams rather than the compute stream, never stalling generation.

    “Offloading and restoration run on side CUDA streams rather than the compute stream, never stalling generation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationnone given
    § 7 Open Foundations for Agentic RL · p. 33

    The MiMo-V2.6 series demonstrates the potential of reinforcement learning to substantially advance agentic capabilities.

    “The MiMo-V2.6 series demonstrates the potential of reinforcement learning to substantially advance agentic capabilities.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 6.4 Training/Inference Consistency and Optimization · p. 32

    The fusion of all loss computation into one kernel saves memory and reduces step time.

    “The fusion saves memory and reduces step time.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 7.2 RL with Open Environments · p. 36

    The progressive qualitative improvements in generated websites align with the quantitative trajectory (61.7 → 64.0 → 72.4) observed in Table 6, jointly demonstrating the cumulative benefits of distillation from MiMo-V2.6 followed by RL in enhancing both the aesthetic quality and functional completeness of generated outputs.

    “These progressive qualitative improvements align with the quantitative trajectory (61 . 7 → 64 . 0 → 72 . 4) observed in Table 6, jointly demonstrating the cumulative benefits of distillation from MiMo-V2.6 followed by RL in enhancing both the aesthetic quality and functional completeness of generated outputs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 8 Conclusion · p. 36

    The advances described enable sustained optimization over long-horizon interactions while improving solution quality and token efficiency.

    “Together, they enable sustained optimization over long-horizon interactions while improving solution quality and token efficiency.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
143 of 143
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    RL is the central training paradigm for advancing large foundation models towards self-improvement.

    “Reinforcement learning (RL) is the central training paradigm for advancing large foundation models towards self-improvement.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    RL for foundation models requires suitable model architectures and a sufficiently rich exploration space for agents.

    “First, RL for foundation models requires suitable model architectures and a sufficiently rich exploration space for agents.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Scaling RL requires sophisticated solutions for infrastructure, environments and grader.

    “Second, scaling RL requires sophisticated solutions for infrastructure, environments and grader.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Realizing scaled RL presents both research and engineering challenges for infrastructure.

    “Realizing these at scale presents both research and engineering challenges for infrastructure.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    OSS-Fuzz supplies tens of thousands of manually confirmed instances, a volume unmatched by other security tasks.

    “OSS-Fuzz supplies tens of thousands of manually confirmed instances, a volume unmatched by other security tasks.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Complex C/C++ projects expose dozens of reachable crash paths.

    “complex C/C++ projects expose dozens of reachable crash paths”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    LLM-based judging returns different verdicts for the same PoC across runs and cannot serve as a stable reward.

    “LLM-based judging returns different verdicts for the same PoC across runs and cannot serve as a stable reward.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Agents can sometimes earn high rewards by exploiting the environment or the evaluation process, and this reward hacking can be reinforced during training, increasing scores without improving task performance.

    “agents can sometimes earn high rewards by exploiting the environment or the evaluation process. This behavior, known as reward hacking, can be reinforced during training, increasing scores without improving task performance.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Binary test rewards provide a scalable correctness signal but do not distinguish implementation quality or problem-solving behavior among passing solutions.

    “For code agent tasks, binary test rewards provide a scalable correctness signal but do not distinguish implementation quality or problem-solving behavior among passing solutions.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Comparing multiple offline rollouts exposes different solution approaches, recurring mistakes, and useful behaviors that may be distributed across several trajectories.

    “Comparing these attempts exposes different solution approaches, recurring mistakes, and useful behaviors that may be distributed across several trajectories.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Outcome rewards can reinforce faulty intermediate behavior.

    “Outcome rewards can reinforce faulty intermediate behavior, motivating segment-level rules for format violations and tool call errors such as malformed markup, invalid tool names, or malformed arguments.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Reliable RL rewards are difficult to design for open-domain tasks.

    “For open-domain tasks where reliable RL rewards are difficult to design, we train SFT teachers on high-quality synthetic demonstrations.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Reliable training-time verification is challenging for domains with complex environments or verifiers that are difficult to design.

    “MOPD2further extends the capabilities of the RL-trained model to domains where reliable trainingtime verification is challenging, including those with complex environments or verifiers that are difficult to design, such as long-horizon game development, scientific research, and embodied intelligence.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    As the policy evolves, it may discover shortcuts that were not found during adversarial screening.

    “As the policy evolves, it may discover shortcuts that were not found during adversarial screening.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A useful behavior may appear in only one attempt, and a requirement supported by the task may be absent from every observed solution.

    “A useful behavior may appear in only one attempt, and a requirement supported by the task may be absent from every observed solution.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The sampled rollouts inform rubric construction, but the criteria are grounded in the task itself.

    “The sampled rollouts inform rubric construction, but the criteria are grounded in the task itself.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The grader can inspect repository code and run targeted tests to better understand the task and verify candidate solutions.

    “The grader can inspect repository code and run targeted tests to better understand the task and verify candidate solutions.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Agentic rollouts span multiple turns and dialogue contexts, while outcome rewards provide only coarse supervision.

    “Agentic rollouts span multiple turns and dialogue contexts, while outcome rewards provide only coarse supervision.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Group-wise algorithms spread the outcome reward evenly across all model-generated tokens of a sequence.

    “Group-wise algorithms spread the outcome reward evenly across all modelgenerated tokens of a sequence.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Within the trajectory hierarchy, credit is rarely uniform: some turns are off-path or degenerate, and some failures are unrelated to the model.

    “Within the hierarchy above, credit is rarely uniform: some turns are off-path or degenerate, and some failures are unrelated to the model.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Scaling RL training to large batches increases rollout concurrency and the memory and communication costs of trajectory data.

    “Scaling RL training to large batches increases rollout concurrency and the memory and communication costs of trajectory data.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Mixed-task batches add another axis of heterogeneity: a single batch mixes several harnesses, with each training sample group bound to one harness.

    “Mixed-task batches add another axis of heterogeneity: a single batch mixes several harnesses, with each training sample group bound to one harness.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A dedicated Ray actor for every harness instance and Agent Loop would cost one file descriptor per actor on Ray's global control store (GCS) node, and a large batch would exhaust the GCS node's file descriptors.

    “A dedicated Ray actor for every harness instance and Agent Loop would cost one file descriptor per actor on Ray's global control store (GCS) node, and a large batch would exhaust the GCS node's file descriptors.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    One process can import only one harness codebase, so different codebases run in separate pools.

    “One process can import only one harness codebase, so different codebases run in separate pools.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Mixed-task RL must preserve this distribution despite large variations in rollout duration and filtering rates, so that every data source is trained effectively.

    “Mixed-task RL must preserve this distribution despite large variations in rollout duration and filtering rates, so that every data source is trained effectively.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Slower sources need more concurrent rollouts to sustain the same training contribution.

    “Slower sources need more concurrent rollouts to sustain the same training contribution.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Long sequences also inflate the memory footprint, and MoE expert imbalance pushes peak memory higher.

    “Long sequences also inflate the memory footprint, and MoE expert imbalance pushes peak memory higher.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Scaling RL computation and broadening the coverage of environments and harnesses create more opportunities for exploration and learning.

    “Scaling RL computation and broadening the coverage of environments and harnesses create more opportunities for exploration and learning.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Across these settings, effective exploration depends on coordinating actions and responding to environmental feedback.

    “Across these settings, effective exploration depends on coordinating actions and responding to environmental feedback.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Realizing the potential of agentic RL therefore begins with a strong foundation of task-solving capabilities.

    “Realizing the potential of agentic RL therefore begins with a strong foundation of task-solving capabilities.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Fresh-start replay assumes that stored rollouts were generated under the run's starting policy.

    “Fresh-start replay assumes that stored rollouts were generated under the run's starting policy”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Building on this progress requires capable models and high-quality RL environments that pair meaningful tasks with reliable verifiers.

    “Building on this progress requires capable models and high-quality RL environments that pair meaningful tasks with reliable verifiers.”
32 of 32

Cites

Part of this paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.

Flagged first, then by citations

11 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Authors
Core Team, Qiao, Z., Hua, Z., Ou, Z., Yue, Z., Jiang, Z., Huang, Z., Chen, Z., Zheng, Z., Xu, Z., Ma, Z., Hu, Y., Dong, Y., Zhang, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Yang, Y., Cai, Y., Zhao, Y., Yan, Y., Zhang, Y., Song, Y., Wei, X., Zhang, X., Zhang, X., Liu, X., Ji, X., Deng, X., Guo, X., Ma, W., Xiong, W., Wang, W., Zhuang, W., Liu, S., Ren, S., Gu, S., Chen, S., Cao, S., Yu, S., Li, S., Zhou, S., Zhang, S., Li, R., Wang, Q., Fang, Q., Chen, Q., Wang, M., Wang, L., Yao, L., Zhang, L., Cheng, L., Zhao, L., Li, L., Dong, J., Xiang, J., Wei, J., Duo, J., Liu, H., Fan, H., Guan, H., Xu, H., Tian, H., Li, H., Zhang, H., Wang, G., Luo, F., Wei, F., Zhang, D., Zhu, D., Lou, C., He, C., He, C., Liu, C., Ye, B., Shen, B., Xu, B., Yang, B., Xia, B., Xiao, B., Xu, B., Mao, Z., Zhang, Z., Xu, Z., Lin, Z., Tang, Z., Huang, Z., Weng, Y., Xiang, Y., Li, Y., Yang, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Tian, Y., Dong, Y., Cheng, Y., He, Y., Liang, Y., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Gong, Y., Zhang, Y., Xin, Y., Zhang, X., Zhao, X., Yang, W., Huang, W., Li, W., Huang, T., Yu, T., Lu, T., Yang, T., Du, S., Tian, S., Du, S., Wang, S., Fang, S., Zhang, Q., Yang, Q., Yu, Q., Tu, Q., Xie, P., Wang, P., Li, P., Guo, M., Shao, M., Gao, L., Wang, L., Shi, L., Chen, K., Liu, K., Wang, K., Yang, K., Xue, J., Zhang, J., Liu, J., An, H., Peng, H., Lü, H., Wang, G., Yang, F., Cao, F., Liu, F., Cui, F., Wang, C., Chen, C., Bai, C., Zhu, C., Wang, C., & Zeng, B.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7221085236
Cited by
0
References
46
Type
posted content
Open access
Locations
arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review