On the Suitability of Reinforcement Fine-Tuning to Visual Tasks

Xiaxu Chen, Wei Li, Chunxu Liu, Chi Xie, Xiaoyan Hu +3 more
4/8/2025
cs.CV

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 2 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) is proved to be greatly valuable for enhancing the reasoning ability of LLMs. Researchers have been starting to apply RFT to MLLMs, hoping it will also enhance the capabilities of visual understanding. However, these works are at a very early stage and have not examined how suitable RFT actually is for visual tasks. In this work, we endeavor to understand the suitabilities and limitations of RFT for visual tasks, through experimental analysis and observations. We start by quantitative comparisons on various tasks, which shows RFT is generally better than SFT on visual tasks. %especially when the number of training samples are limited. To check whether such advantages are brought up by the reasoning process, we design a new reward that encourages the model to ``think'' more, whose results show more thinking can be beneficial for complicated tasks but harmful for simple tasks. We hope this study can provide more insight for the rapid advancements on this topic.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 2 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{chen2025suitability,
  title  = {On the Suitability of Reinforcement Fine-Tuning to Visual Tasks},
  author = {Xiaxu Chen and Wei Li and Chunxu Liu and Chi Xie and Xiaoyan Hu and Chengqian Ma and Feng Zhu and Rui Zhao},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2504.05682},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.05682v2}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2504.05682.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2504.05682)

Discussion