Papers › Why Does RL Generalize Better Than SFT? A Data-Centric Perspective on VLM Post-Training

Why Does RL Generalize Better Than SFT? A Data-Centric Perspective on VLM Post-Training

11 Feb 2026arXiv:2602.10815added by Syntology

Aojun Lu, Tao Feng, Hangjie Yuan, Wei Li, Yanan Sun

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

The adaptation of large-scale Vision-Language Models (VLMs) through post-training reveals a pronounced generalization gap: models fine-tuned with Reinforcement Learning (RL) consistently achieve superior out-of-distribution (OOD) performance compared to those trained with Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT). This paper posits a data-centric explanation for this phenomenon, contending that RL's generalization advantage arises from an implicit data filtering mechanism that inherently prioritizes medium-difficulty training samples. To test this hypothesis, we systematically evaluate the OOD generalization of SFT models across training datasets of varying difficulty levels. Our results confirm that data difficulty is a critical factor, revealing that training on hard samples significantly degrades OOD performance. Motivated by this finding, we introduce Difficulty-Curated SFT (DC-SFT), a straightforward method that explicitly filters the training set based on sample difficulty. Experiments show that DC-SFT not only substantially enhances OOD generalization over standard SFT, but also surpasses the performance of RL-based training, all while providing greater stability and computational efficiency. This work offers a data-centric account of the OOD generalization gap in VLMs and establishes a more efficient pathway to achieving robust generalization. Code is available at https://github.com/byyx666/DC-SFT.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

4 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 4 of the 4 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from byyx666/DC-SFT. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2602.10815, was issued in February 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections