Skip to content
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
31 changes: 31 additions & 0 deletions benchmark/reports/guru_math.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
# Guru-Math Benchmark Results

## 1. Task Introduction

Guru-Math is the mathematics task derived from the [Guru](https://huggingface.co/datasets/LLM360/guru-RL-92k) dataset, comprising 54.4k samples. The data primarily focuses on competition-level problems and symbolic reasoning.

## 2. Experimental Settings

We evaluate the performance of the following methods within the Trinity-RFT framework using version [0.3.3](https://github.com/modelscope/Trinity-RFT/releases/tag/v0.3.3) (verl==0.5.0, vllm==0.10.2). For comparison, we ported relevant code from [Reasoning360](https://github.com/LLM360/Reasoning360) to be compatible with verl==0.5.0.

Within both Trinity-RFT and veRL, we evaluate performance using the GRPO algorithm on this task. We fine-tune a base `Qwen2.5-7B` model that has not undergone prior fine-tuning.

To ensure a fair comparison, Trinity-RFT employs the following training hyperparameters: `batch_size=60`, `sync_interval=8`, `lr_warmup_steps=80` (aligned with veRL's hyperparameters of `train_batch_size=480`, `ppo_mini_batch_size=60`, and `lr_warmup_steps=10`), `lr=1e-6`, `kl_coef=0.0`, `weight_decay=0.1`, and `total_epochs=1`. Additionally, to assess the impact of one-step offset training in Trinity-RFT, we conduct an extra experiment with `sync_offset=1` under the same configuration.

## 3. Results and Analysis

The table below presents a comparison of training times between Trinity-RFT and veRL on the Guru-Math dataset.

| Method | Training Time (seconds) | Relative Time (%) |
|--------|-------------------------|-------------------|
| veRL | 47,123 | 100.00 |
| Trinity-RFT | 54,045 | 114.69 |
| Trinity-RFT (one-step offset) | 45,053 | 95.61 |

The figure below shows the reward curve on the Guru-Math dataset.

![](../../docs/sphinx_doc/assets/guru_math_reward.png)

To evaluate training effectiveness, we test models on the `AMC23`, `AIME2024`, `AIME2025`, `MATH500`, and `Minerva` benchmarks. The figure below compares the performance of checkpoints obtained from Trinity-RFT and veRL after training on the Guru-Math dataset. Each point in the plot corresponds to a checkpoint, with the x-axis representing its cumulative training time (in seconds) and the y-axis indicating its accuracy on the respective evaluation benchmark.

![](../../docs/sphinx_doc/assets/guru_math_eval.png)
Binary file added docs/sphinx_doc/assets/guru_math_eval.png
Loading
Sorry, something went wrong. Reload?
Sorry, we cannot display this file.
Sorry, this file is invalid so it cannot be displayed.
Binary file added docs/sphinx_doc/assets/guru_math_reward.png
Loading
Sorry, something went wrong. Reload?
Sorry, we cannot display this file.
Sorry, this file is invalid so it cannot be displayed.