DeepSeek-R1 on Nature: How Pure Reinforcement Learning Unlocks LLM Reasoning
Posted by First_Ground_9849@reddit | LocalLLaMA | View on Reddit | 10 comments
Hey everyone,
Big news in the AI world today—**DeepSeek-R1** is featured on the cover of *Nature*! This is a significant milestone for reinforcement learning and reasoning in large language models.
Here’s what makes this groundbreaking:
### 🧠 Pure Reinforcement Learning Breakthrough
- DeepSeek-R1 is the **first model** to achieve state-of-the-art reasoning **without any supervised fine-tuning (SFT)**.
- It uses **Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO)**, a novel RL method that reduces computational cost while maintaining high performance.
- The model **autonomously developed** advanced reasoning strategies like self-reflection, verification, and dynamic adaptation—all through RL, **without human demonstrations**.
### 🏆 Top-Tier Performance
- **AIME 2024**:
- `pass@1`: **77.9%** → with self-consistency: **86.7%** (surpassing human average)
- **MATH-500**: **97.3%** (pass@1)
- **Codeforces Rating**: **2029** (Top 5% globally)
- Also excels in biology, physics, chemistry, and broader benchmarks like MMLU-Pro (**84.0%**), AlpacaEval 2.0 (**87.6%**), and Arena-Hard (**92.3%**)
### 🔍 Emergent Reasoning Behaviors
During training, the model showed:
- **Self-correction**: “Aha moments” where it reevaluated its reasoning (e.g., sudden increase in the word “wait”)
- **Long-chain reasoning**: Generating hundreds to thousands of tokens to solve complex problems
- **Adaptive token usage**: Using more tokens for hard problems, fewer for easy ones
### 🌍 Open Research & Model Release
DeepSeek has released:
- **DeepSeek-R1-Zero** (pure RL version)
- **DeepSeek-R1** (multistage RL + SFT for alignment)
- **Distilled smaller models** for broader accessibility
- All **code, weights, and data** under MIT license
### 📌 Limitations & Future Work
The model still has room for improvement in:
- Tool use (e.g., calculators, search)
- Token efficiency (sometimes overthinks)
- Language mixing (optimized for EN/ZH only)
- Prompt sensitivity (works best zero-shot)
But the work proves that **pure RL can unlock reasoning** without human data—paving the way for more autonomous, self-improving AI.
**Paper & Resources:**
- [Nature Article](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09422-z)
- [GitHub Repo](https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1)
- [Hugging Face](https://huggingface.co/DeepSeek-ai)
What do you think? Is pure RL the future of LLM training?
inner2021planet@reddit
Seriously, wow. No wonder 5T USD was wiped off the global market...
First_Ground_9849@reddit (OP)
Also see https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02979-9
vindictive_text@reddit
Yes, it's important to have the official scientists at Nature sniff your model to make sure it cannot utter an impure, unpatriotic, or unkind word. Think of the children who might be exposed to racism or hacking.
llmentry@reddit
Um, no ... it's important to ensure that benchmarks weren't gamed, and that technical details weren't glossed over or missing. Yes, these included details of relative safety measures. But that doesn't mean the paper would have been rejected if the model was unsafe, only that this is an area of interest to the field, and thus useful to see actual comparative data on.
If you compare the published paper to the preprint, one area where DeepSeek provides a lot more details is how they moved from pure boostrapped simulated reasoning in R1-zero to the curated, synthetic reasoning data used to train R1. That is an area where OpenAI claimed DeepSeek had stolen the o1 reasoning traces -- here, DeepSeek make it clear that this synthetic data was generated from R1-zero's output only. That's huge -- it shows that DeepSeek was built from the ground-up with no leaning on any closed model. And those details are probably in there thanks to peer review.
TheRealMasonMac@reddit
Just peer review Nature's peer review. ez fix
Thrumpwart@reddit
So this is their January paper on RL and GRPO that has just been published after peer review. There have been some minor changes responding to certain criticisms and requests for clarification.
Still a great paper, but not entirely new.
llmentry@reddit
Yes, publishing (esp. in Nature) takes time! But if you wanted to the triumph of open source over closed, this would be the moment.
FullOf_Bad_Ideas@reddit
R1-Zero does Instruct-style reasoning loops in the thinking phase, I don't think it's possible that it hasn't seen SFT-type data coming from Instruct output of other LLMs and mixed into pre-training dataset, otherwise it wouldn't have those patterns IMO.
Kooky-Somewhere-2883@reddit
lol
First_Ground_9849@reddit (OP)
https://www.nature.com/nature/volumes/645/issues/8081