Skip to content
← Back to explorer

R1-Code-Interpreter: LLMs Reason with Code via Supervised and Multi-stage Reinforcement Learning

Yongchao Chen, Yueying Liu, Junwei Zhou, Yilun Hao, Jingquan Wang, Yang Zhang, Na Li, Chuchu Fan · May 27, 2025 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Provisional trust

This page is a lightweight research summary built from the abstract and metadata while deeper extraction catches up.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Provisional

Derived from abstract and metadata only.

Abstract

Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking. We present R1-Code-Interpreter, an extension of a text-only LLM trained via multi-turn supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) to autonomously generate multiple code queries during step-by-step reasoning. Unlike prior RL + tool-use efforts focused on narrow domains such as math or retrieval, we curate 144 diverse reasoning and planning tasks and show that training a general-purpose Code Interpreter across them presents significant challenges due to task heterogeneity and scarcity of effective samples. To address this, we introduce a multi-stage curriculum learning approach that partitions training samples by measured improvement potential. The RL training prioritizes samples with higher potential and gradually shifts to lower-potential ones, increasing the average RL gains from merely +3.4% to +9.3% across Qwen-2.5 models (3/7/14B). Our final model, R1-CI-14B, improves average accuracy on the 37 test tasks from 44.1% to 72.4%, outperforming text-only GPT-4o (58.6%) and GPT-4o with Code Interpreter (70.9%). Notably, R1-CI-14B also exhibits emergent self-checking behavior through code generation. Datasets, Codes, and Models are available at https://github.com/yongchao98/R1-Code-Interpreter and https://huggingface.co/yongchao98.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This page is still relying on abstract and metadata signals, not a fuller protocol read.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

Signal extraction is still processing. This page currently shows metadata-first guidance until structured protocol fields are ready.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A provisional background reference while structured extraction finishes.

Main weakness

This page is still relying on abstract and metadata signals, not a fuller protocol read.

Trust level

Provisional

Usefulness score

Unavailable

Eval-fit score is unavailable until extraction completes.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Provisional (processing)

Extraction confidence 0%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

provisional (inferred)

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking."

Evaluation Modes

provisional (inferred)

Automatic metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking."

Quality Controls

provisional (inferred)

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking."

Benchmarks / Datasets

provisional (inferred)

MATH

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

"Unlike prior RL + tool-use efforts focused on narrow domains such as math or retrieval, we curate 144 diverse reasoning and planning tasks and show that training a general-purpose Code Interpreter across them presents significant challenges due to task heterogeneity and scarcity of effective samples."

Reported Metrics

provisional (inferred)

Accuracy

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Our final model, R1-CI-14B, improves average accuracy on the 37 test tasks from 44.1% to 72.4%, outperforming text-only GPT-4o (58.6%) and GPT-4o with Code Interpreter (70.9%)."

Rater Population

provisional (inferred)

Unknown

Rater source not explicitly reported.

"Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking."

Human Feedback Details

This page is using abstract-level cues only right now. Treat the signals below as provisional.

  • Potential human-data signal: No explicit human-data keywords detected.
  • Potential benchmark anchors: MATH
  • Abstract highlights: 3 key sentence(s) extracted below.

Evaluation Details

Evaluation fields are inferred from the abstract only.

  • Potential evaluation modes: Automatic metrics
  • Potential metric signals: Accuracy
  • Confidence: Provisional (metadata-only fallback).

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking.
  • We present R1-Code-Interpreter, an extension of a text-only LLM trained via multi-turn supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) to autonomously generate multiple code queries during step-by-step reasoning.
  • Unlike prior RL + tool-use efforts focused on narrow domains such as math or retrieval, we curate 144 diverse reasoning and planning tasks and show that training a general-purpose Code Interpreter across them presents significant challenges due to task heterogeneity and scarcity of effective samples.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against others mentioning MATH.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Automatic metrics) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended Queries

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

No related papers found for this item yet.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.