user
3 days ago
3 days ago
3 days ago
> One might note that MCTS uses more inference compute on a per-sample basis than GRPO: of course it performs better
This part confused me, it sounded like they were only doing the MCTS at train time, and then using GRPO to distill the MCTS policy into the model weights. So wouldn’t the model still have the same inference cost?
3 days ago
Ah, I meant that MCTS uses more inference-time compute (over GRPO) to produce a training sample
3 days ago
I may never understand what harness means - it's used in so many contexts
3 days ago
Its a thing that isn't part of the "subject", used with the subject, to manipulate the state of the "the subject" to be closer to what we want.
3 days ago
Great post! I wonder why MCTS is not more popular as a test time compute harness. Did you compare performance of MCTS (without distillation) against other methods (eg best of N) with the same compute budget?
a day ago
I didn't compare with the harness (focused on distillation) but the original ToT paper has a section on it: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10601
3 days ago
Why is almost every RL paper done on Qwen-2.5 ? That decreases its credibility.
3 days ago
It makes it easier to compare with other papers. If two different papers apply different methods to different models and get different results, how do you know which method is better?
Once you have identified the best method and want to productize it, it would of course make sense to apply it on top of the best model, but if you're just doing research, you can skip that expensive last step.
3 days ago
> Why is almost every RL paper done on Qwen-2.5 ?
In what way does using this model reduce the authors credibility?
3 days ago
great write up (and effort!! ;))
what are your thoughts on MCTS for coding?
this can/must be paired with a smart execution harness to optimise roll out and roll back of execution paths and system state.
does this change the calculus for optimal post-training ?
3 days ago
[flagged]
3 days ago
[dead]
3 days ago
[dead]