Skip to lesson
Exit
Deep Dive: RL for Coding Agents1 / 3

1 min lesson

RLHF vs RLVR

Put this idea into your own words: "RLHF learns a reward model from human preferences."

Step 1 of 3

Where does the reward come from? That single question splits modern post-training into two camps and coding sits awkwardly across the line between them.

RLHF learns a reward model from human preferences. RLVR reads reward straight off a verifier - a compiler, a test suite, a proof checker. The deep-dive will push on which one you'd reach for and, more sharply, how each one fails.

Learn more

Advanced table

RLVR scales with compute, RLHF with human labor

Reward source
RLHF (human feedback)
Learned model trained on human preference pairs
RLVR (verifiable reward)
Deterministic checker: tests, compiler, proof
Where it shines
RLHF (human feedback)
Taste, tone, helpfulness - things with no ground truth
RLVR (verifiable reward)
Math, code, anywhere correctness is checkable
Signal quality
RLHF (human feedback)
Noisy, biased by labelers, trained on far less data than the base model
RLVR (verifiable reward)
Clean, scalable, reproducible
Main failure
RLHF (human feedback)
Reward model is gameable and drifts off-distribution
RLVR (verifiable reward)
Reward is only as honest as the verifier
Scales by
RLHF (human feedback)
Collecting more human labels (slow, costly)
RLVR (verifiable reward)
Running more environments (compute, not humans)

RLVR scales with compute, RLHF with human labor - a big reason top-tier reasoning runs lean on RLVR.