- The paper introduces CrEST, a hierarchical credit-assignment method that combines independently verified turn-level advantages with entropy-gated self-teacher weighting while preserving verifier-determined update directions.
- CrEST reaches 52.00% average BFCL V3 accuracy for Qwen3-4B and 50.00% for Qwen3-8B, outperforming baselines in 13 of 14 evaluation cells and improving long-context performance most strongly.
- Ablations show that inter-turn segmentation and intra-turn modulation are complementary, while removing either the direction or entropy gate causes major losses, demonstrating the importance of bounded, uncertainty-aware updates.
Motivation and problem statement
Multi-turn multi-step tool-use agents expose a credit assignment failure that single-turn RL does not: within a session, individual turns succeed or fail independently, yet standard RLVR objectives broadcast a single trajectory-level reward across all tokens. The paper frames this as a two-level problem — inter-turn dilution, where heterogeneous per-turn outcomes are averaged into one advantage, and intra-turn uniformity, where pivot decisions and low-entropy formatting tokens receive identical gradient weight. The empirical stakes are high: on WildToolBench, no model exceeds 15% session accuracy, and performance degrades sharply with turn count.
The authors position CrEST against two existing paradigms. RLVR offers a verifier-bounded ceiling but sparse, trajectory-level signal; on-policy distillation (OPD) provides dense per-token supervision via reverse KL against a same-family teacher, but its ceiling is teacher-bounded and it requires tokenizer-matched teachers. On-policy self-distillation (OPSD) removes the external teacher by conditioning the student on privileged information (e.g., ground truth), but is brittle — collapsing within roughly 100 steps without per-token KL clipping due to gradient concentration on a few tokens — and remains teacher-bounded. The central question the paper poses is whether dense token-level signal can be retained without sacrificing the verifier-bounded ceiling.
Method
CrEST (Hierarchical Credit Assignment via Entropy-Gated Self-Teacher) uses a standard on-policy policy gradient with a structured per-token advantage:
At=A[t]turn⋅ϕt
Inter-turn level. Within a GRPO group of G rollouts, each turn k receives its own verified reward Rk, and group-relative advantages are computed independently per turn. A failed turn therefore receives negative advantage regardless of other turns' outcomes. This contrasts with MT-GRPO's cumulative propagation of future-outcome credit to earlier turns.
Intra-turn level. A privileged self-teacher — the same model conditioned on ground-truth context — yields a token-level divergence Δt. This is converted into a bounded weight wt=clip(exp(sign(A[t]turn)⋅Δt),1−ϵ,1+ϵ), where the sign-alignment construction ensures teacher agreement amplifies updates along the verifier-approved direction for both positive- and negative-advantage tokens.
Stabilization gates. Two composed gates control where and how much the teacher acts:
- Direction gate: suppresses the teacher entirely when sign(Atturn)⋅Δt≤0, ensuring the teacher never overrides verifier-determined direction.
- Entropy gate: modulates reweighting strength by student surprisal ut=−logπθ(yt), Z-normalized and passed through a sigmoid, so high-uncertainty content tokens receive amplified modulation while low-entropy format tokens are damped.
The composed factor satisfies three formal properties proven in the appendix: (P1) direction preservation (ϕt>0 always, so the sign of every token's advantage equals the turn-level sign); (P2) an absolute perturbation bound ∥t∑(ϕt−1)gt∥≤λϵt∑∥gt∥ (≈8.4% per-token amplification with defaults); and (P3) sign-consistent amplification (G0 when active). Notably, the authors are careful to state these are local, token-wise guarantees — they do not imply aggregate gradient directions, stationary points, or a global verifier-bounded optimum, since reweighted token gradients can cancel differently. Only G1 is tuned; G2, G3, and G4 are fixed constants.
Experimental results
Experiments cover BFCL V3 multi-turn (Base, Missing Functions, Missing Parameters, Long Context splits) and WildToolBench, using Qwen3-4B-Instruct and Qwen3-8B with group size G5 on 8×H200 GPUs. Baselines span GRPO, MT-GRPO, EnvTuning (process rewards), OPD (with Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct / Qwen3-32B as teachers), and OPSD.
CrEST achieves 52.00% average accuracy on BFCL V3 (Qwen3-4B) and 50.00% (Qwen3-8B), versus base-model scores of 22.12% and 33.38%, and reaches best-or-tied results in 13 of 14 cells. On WildToolBench session accuracy — the strictest end-to-end metric — CrEST attains 7.03% (4B) and 9.38% (8B), still far below task accuracy (~48–52%), underscoring how difficult full-session consistency remains. Gains are largest precisely where credit dilution is worst: +7.0 over the strongest baseline on Long Context (4B) and +1.57 on WildToolBench session accuracy (8B).
Two secondary findings are notable. First, RL-based methods systematically outperform distillation-based ones at both scales; OPSD scores 38.75% on 4B BFCL Avg, below even plain GRPO (43.63%), providing direct evidence for the teacher-bounded ceiling claim. Second, within the RL family, finer-grained credit helps monotonically (MT-GRPO 49.25% > EnvTuning 47.25% > GRPO 43.63%), leaving headroom that CrEST fills.
Training dynamics and ablations
Mechanistically, CrEST converges faster than GRPO (0.60 rollout accuracy by step ~20 vs. ~0.57 at step 160) and surpasses the OPSD plateau (~0.49, declining thereafter) by step 20, continuing to ~0.70. Gradient concentration analysis shows OPSD places ~42% of total gradient magnitude on the top-1% of tokens and ~77% on the top-5%, while GRPO is diffuse (top-10% ≈ 31%). CrEST occupies an intermediate regime (top-10% ≈ 57%) — more differentiated than GRPO, far less collapsed than OPSD.
Ablations confirm both levels are necessary and complementary: inter-turn segmentation alone improves 43.63 → 47.88; intra-turn modulation alone reaches 48.75; combined, 52.00 (+8.37). Gate ablations show removing the direction gate costs −5.25 points (largest drop on Missing Parameters, consistent with the teacher overriding verifier signals on ambiguous parameter tokens); removing the entropy gate costs −5.75 (Long Context falls 60.0 → 49.0); removing both collapses to GRPO-level 43.50%. A λ sensitivity analysis identifies 0.3 as optimal — λ=0.5 causes over-concentration and stagnation below the inter-turn-only result.
Limitations and open questions
The evaluation is restricted to two tool-use benchmarks at 4B/8B scale, with a single training seed per method and repeated decodes measuring only decoding consistency rather than training variance. The turn-index alignment assumption — all rollouts in a group share the same fixed session and ordered turns — is specific to these benchmarks and does not extend to variable turn structures, terminal-only rewards, or strongly coupled turns lacking local verification. The entropy gate's use of surprisal as a proxy for token importance is acknowledged as a heuristic that may not capture informativeness in all generation contexts. The formal guarantees are explicitly local: the paper does not establish that aggregate optimization targets or stationary points remain verifier-determined, leaving open whether magnitude-only modulation preserves global optimality properties. Whether adaptive scheduling of λ across training stages, or combining CrEST with finer process-reward designs, yields compounding gains remains untested.
Conclusion
CrEST demonstrates that a privileged self-teacher can be useful without determining update directions: restricting it to uncertainty-gated magnitude modulation atop turn-segmented verified advantages resolves both inter-turn dilution and intra-turn token uniformity, yielding consistent gains over RL and distillation baselines across two model scales, with the largest improvements on long-trajectory and strict session-level metrics.