Shorten After You're Right: Lazy Length Penalties for Reasoning RL
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Large reasoning models, such as OpenAI o1 or DeepSeek R1, have demonstrated remarkable performance on reasoning tasks but often incur a long reasoning path with significant memory and time costs. Existing methods primarily aim to shorten reasoning paths by introducing additional training data and stages. In this paper, we propose three critical reward designs integrated directly into the reinforcement learning process of large reasoning models, which reduce the response length without extra training stages. Experiments on four settings show that our method significantly decreases response length while maintaining or even improving performance. Specifically, in a logic reasoning setting, we achieve a 40% reduction in response length averaged by steps alongside a 14% gain in performance. For math problems, we reduce response length averaged by steps by 33% while preserving performance.
Results and benchmarks
Large reasoning models, such as OpenAI o1 or DeepSeek R1, have demonstrated remarkable performance on reasoning tasks but often incur a long reasoning path with significant memory and time costs.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
Historical official implementation (not recommended for new builds)
Only a historical official implementation is available
Use with caution for new projects; verify against current tooling and maintained community alternatives.
lblankl/short-rl · 19 stars · Last push Apr 16, 2026
Only historical official repository was found (lblankl/short-rl).
Open lblankl/short-rl- Only historical official implementation is available
- No direct maintained implementation is currently verified.
- Only historical official repository was found: lblankl/short-rl.
- No maintained paper-verified implementation met reliability thresholds.
Compare implementation paths
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
- Maintenance
- Recently updated
- Confidence
- High
- Reproducibility
- Limited
- Stars
- 19
- Last push
- Apr 16, 2026 (131d)
Official implementation from Papers with Code · Repository link is mentioned in the paper metadata
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
- Maintenance
- Recently updated
- Confidence
- Low
- Reproducibility
- Limited
- Stars
- 19
- Last push
- Apr 16, 2026 (131d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Reproduction readiness
Major work
No dependency manifest, manual reconstruction required
- lblankl/short-rl has no requirements.txt, environment.yml, pyproject.toml, or Dockerfile.
- You will need to reverse-engineer dependencies from import statements in the source code.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- lblankl/Short-RL
Confidence: Low · 19 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
None detected
Methods
Reinforcement learning
Domains
None detected
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Data includes links from Papers with Code ( CC-BY-SA-4.0 ).