DataFlex-RL: An Evaluation Platform for RLVR Data Policies
DataFlex-RL benchmark of 13 RLVR data policies on Qwen2.5-7B finds none reproducibly beats uniform sampling under matched GRPO training.
DataFlex-RL is an evaluation platform comparing rollout-selection, reweighting, and mixture data policies for RLVR under a common GRPO recipe. Across 13 configurations and 12 matched seeds with Qwen2.5-7B-Base on 12 math, logic, and science benchmarks, uniform GRPO improved domain-balanced accuracy by 7.76 points, but no alternative policy achieved a statistically significant improvement. A corrected 12-seed Llama-3.1-8B-Base extension found no consistent winner, and math-heavy evaluation summaries were negatively correlated (-0.33) with domain-balanced summaries.
- Uniform GRPO improves domain-balanced accuracy 7.76 points over untrained baseline
- No rollout-selection or reweighting method significantly beats uniform sampling
- Math-heavy benchmark rankings negatively correlate (-0.33) with balanced rankings
- 12-seed Llama-3.1-8B extension shows no consistent winner
Full article227 words · extracted from huggingface.co · click to collapse
Data policies for reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) determine which rollouts are used, how strongly they are weighted, and which domains contribute to subsequent training batches. We introduce DataFlex-RL, an evaluation platform for comparing these choices under a common GRPO recipe. Our primary experiment evaluates 13 configurations across 12 matched seeds using Qwen2.5-7B-Base and 12 mathematics, logic, and science benchmarks. Uniform GRPO improves the domain-balanced average accuracy by 7.76 percentage points over the untrained checkpoint. None of the eight rollout-selection or reweighting methods achieves a paired 95% confidence interval that excludes zero relative to uniform sampling, and none of the three adaptive mixtures outperforms a fixed equal mixture at the same level of precision. A corrected 12-seed extension on Llama-3.1-8B-Base places the additional methods on the same score scale as the original controls, but does not reveal a consistent winner in terms of observed mean performance. We also quantify evaluation sensitivity by rescoring nine Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct runs using a math-heavy six-benchmark summary, consisting of five mathematics benchmarks and GPQA-Diamond but no logic benchmark, and comparing it with the domain-balanced 12-benchmark summary. The resulting rankings are negatively correlated, with a correlation coefficient of -0.33, whereas summaries that retain all 12 benchmarks largely agree. Across the controlled settings studied here, changing the data policy measurably changes the training process but does not produce a reproducible improvement over uniform training.
Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://huggingface.co/papers/2609.06107