Question Begets Question: Self-Evolving Curriculum for Reinforcement Fine-Tuning on Competition Mathematics

Teaching a language model a skill it has not mastered is obstructed by three recurring difficulties: training data is scarce, ground-truth reasoning traces are usually unavailable, and models often exhibit an apparent ceiling beyond which additional data yields no further improvement. We study these difficulties in a controlled setting, fine-tuning Qwen2.5-Math-7B on competition mathematics (AIME), a task on which it initially solves only 5.6\% of problems (pass@1). To address data scarcity, we introduce Question-begets-Question (QbQ), a scalable procedure in which a teacher transforms existing problems into diverse variants that probe the same underlying skills; to model the absence of oracle reasoning, we train exclusively via reinforcement learning on problem statements and final answers, never on teacher reasoning traces. Static training on such data, however, plateaus well short of the task: real-plus-synthetic augmentation and non-curriculum QbQ generated synthetic data training cap pass@1 at 12.5\% and 14.5\% respectively, despite large increases in data. Our central finding is that this ceiling is not intrinsic to the model. We propose a self-evolving curriculum that, each round, evaluates the current checkpoint, seeds QbQ from the problems it can mostly get right, and trains on the resulting variants; under an identical data budget, this breaks the ceiling and lifts pass@1 to 16.5\% with no sign of saturation after 20 rounds. Counterintuitively, we find that models improve when trained on variants of problems they can mostly get right, and that models trained this way go on to solve harder problems never seen during training.

Generalization in offline RL: The structure is more important than the amount of pessimism

While pessimism counteracts overestimation bias in offline reinforcement learning (RL), being overly conservative has been associated with hindering certain forms of generalization. However, in this paper we demonstrate that being overly pessimistic does not inherently prevent optimal generalization in contextual MDPs (CMDPs). Instead, we argue successful generalization depends not on the amount of pessimism, but whether the pessimistic structure respects the underlying symmetries of the optimal solution. We prove that a mildly pessimistic, non-symmetric value function can generalize worse than an overly pessimistic, symmetric one. In offline RL, the structure of the pessimism is determined by the structure of the dataset coverage. As such, enforcing a symmetric value function can be non-trivial, and might require techniques such as data augmentation (DA). Inspired by our theoretical results, we argue that DA can best be applied through a consistency loss during policy extraction, rather than the common practice of (regular) offline training on an augmented dataset. This is empirically validated using IQL and CQL on a rotationally symmetric reacher environment.