NOW LET US – AI RAG SaaS Studio TP.HCM
NOW LET US
Digital Product Studio
Back to news
AGENTIC-SYSTEMS...1 min read

Do Post-Training Algorithms Actually Differ? A Controlled Study Across Model Scales Uncovers Scale-Dependent Ranking Inversions

Share
NOW LET US Article – Do Post-Training Algorithms Actually Differ? A Controlled Study Across Model Scales Uncovers Scale-Dependent Ranking Inversions

A large-scale study using the OXRL framework reveals that post-training algorithm performance is highly scale-dependent, with model size being a far more significant factor than loss function tweaks.

Computer Science > Machine Learning

Title:Do Post-Training Algorithms Actually Differ? A Controlled Study Across Model Scales Uncovers Scale-Dependent Ranking Inversions

View PDF HTML (experimental)Abstract:Post-training alignment has produced dozens of competing algorithms -- DPO, SimPO, KTO, GRPO, and others -- yet practitioners lack controlled comparisons to guide algorithm selection. We present OXRL, a unified framework implementing 51 post-training algorithms with identical infrastructure, enabling the first large-scale apples-to-apples evaluation. Our study spans 8 algorithms across 4 model scales (0.5B--7B), 3 evaluation domains, and a 20-variant DPO taxonomy (100 runs at 1.5B, 5 seeds each), totaling $\sim$240 training runs on H100 GPUs. Three headline findings emerge. (1)~Algorithm rankings are unstable across scale: at 1.5B, online RL (SGRPO) tops all methods at 58.0%~$\pm$0.57 on GSM8K; by 7B, the worst small-scale method (SimPO) becomes the best (85.8%), a complete ranking inversion driven by model scale rather than LoRA regularization (confirmed via 2$\times$2 factorial). (2)~Loss function modifications yield negligible gains: none of 20 DPO variants significantly outperform vanilla DPO after Bonferroni correction; the sole significant outlier, SimPO, is worse ($-$11.5~pp, $p < 10^{-4}$). (3)~Algorithm leverage is task-specific: the 19.3~pp GSM8K spread collapses to 0.54~pp on MATH ($36\times$) and 0.47~pp on general-domain benchmarks ($41\times$), confirming that algorithm choice matters primarily within the training distribution. These findings yield a hierarchy of leverage for practitioners: model scale (${\sim}$50~pp) $\gg$ training paradigm (${\sim}$10~pp) $\gg$ online vs.\ offline (${\sim}$9~pp) $\gg$ loss function (${\sim}$1~pp). We release all code, configs, and evaluation data as a living community benchmark.

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

Demos

Recommenders and Search Tools

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? **

© 2026 Now Let Us. All rights reserved.

Source: arXiv cs.AI Recent

Advertisement
Ad slot ready: 5887729102

More in this category

EXPLORE TOPICS

Discover All Categories

Deep dive into the specific technology sectors that matter most to you.