arXiv — Machine Learning · · 4 min read

What pass@k Cannot Measure: Evaluating Diversity and Capability Retention after Post-Training

Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Machine Learning

arXiv:2610.07405 (cs)
[Submitted on 5 Oct 2026]

Title:What pass@k Cannot Measure: Evaluating Diversity and Capability Retention after Post-Training

View a PDF of the paper titled What pass@k Cannot Measure: Evaluating Diversity and Capability Retention after Post-Training, by Subham Rath and 3 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:pass@$k$, the fraction of problems a model solves within $k$ sampled attempts, is the field's default protocol for deciding whether reinforcement-learning (RL) post-training on verifiable rewards improved a model. At the population level, pass@$k$ depends only on a problem's probability of a correct sample, with no term for how it is distributed across outputs. We show this gap is not academic. Training Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct on grade-school math with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) and with rejection-sampling fine-tuning (RFT, training on the model's own shortest verifier-passed rollout) moves three complementary diversity measures (token-level entropy, answer-level entropy, unique answers per prompt) in opposite directions, with zero overlap across three seeds per arm. The gap survives restricting to verifier-correct completions only (lexical diversity among correct solutions is 15% lower for GRPO, after controlling for length) and a count-controlled check isolating diversity among incorrect answers alone, ruling out that GRPO's higher accuracy alone explains it. Yet pass@8 and pass@32 show no consistent winner on GSM8K, and a hard MATH-500 subset shows the same pattern: separation only at low $k$. Compared against the starting checkpoint, no trained arm significantly improves hard-problem coverage: RFT is significantly worse, while GRPO is statistically indistinguishable from it - so GRPO's pass@1 edge over RFT reflects a smaller loss relative to Base, not a capability gain, a missing-control issue, not a failure of pass@$k$. On GSM8K, only pass@1, with no role in detecting diversity by construction, separates the arms cleanly, rewarding the arm whose correct solutions are least diverse. We argue this is a concrete instance of a standard evaluation protocol missing a property it is routinely used to certify.
Comments: 10 pages, 2 figures. Accepted to the NeurIPS 2026 Workshop on Transitioning from Pre-training to Post-training (non-archival)
Subjects: Machine Learning (cs.LG)
Cite as: arXiv:2610.07405 [cs.LG]
  (or arXiv:2610.07405v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.07405
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Subham Rath [view email]
[v1] Mon, 5 Oct 2026 21:16:32 UTC (53 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled What pass@k Cannot Measure: Evaluating Diversity and Capability Retention after Post-Training, by Subham Rath and 3 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Additional Features

Current browse context:

cs.LG
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:
cs

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv recommender toggle
IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)
About arXivLabs

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? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — Machine Learning