
Julia Kempe
· Silver Professor of Computer Science, Mathematics and Data ScienceVerifiedNew York University · Computer Science
Active 1999–2026
About
Julia Kempe is a Silver Professor of Computer Science, Mathematics, and Data Science at New York University, affiliated with the Center for Data Science and the Courant Institute. She currently serves as a Director and Senior Researcher at Meta FAIR Paris, leading the Foundations of Reasoning Team. From 2018 to 2023, she was the Director of the Center for Data Science at NYU and was a member of the NYU Senior Leadership Team. Her research focuses on the theory and empirics of machine learning and artificial intelligence, with particular interests in machine learning theory, deep learning and foundation models, AI safety and robustness, and machine learning applications in science, especially physics. Kempe has been recognized with numerous awards and honors, including the Julius Silver, Roslyn S. Silver, and Enid Silver Winslow Professorship at NYU, and she is a fellow of the Asia-Pacific Artificial Intelligence Association. Her work involves advancing understanding of the theoretical foundations of AI, developing robust and interpretable machine learning models, and exploring the implications of AI safety. She has contributed significantly to the academic community through her research, leadership, and mentorship in the field of AI and machine learning.
Research topics
- Artificial Intelligence
- Machine Learning
- Computer Science
- Algorithm
- Mathematical optimization
- Mathematics
Selected publications
Efficient RL Training for LLMs with Experience Replay
ArXiv.org · 2026-04-09
articleOpen accessWhile Experience Replay - the practice of storing rollouts and reusing them multiple times during training - is a foundational technique in general RL, it remains largely unexplored in LLM post-training due to the prevailing belief that fresh, on-policy data is essential for high performance. In this work, we challenge this assumption. We present a systematic study of replay buffers for LLM post-training, formalizing the optimal design as a trade-off between staleness-induced variance, sample diversity and the high computational cost of generation. We show that strict on-policy sampling is suboptimal when generation is expensive. Empirically, we show that a well-designed replay buffer can drastically reduce inference compute without degrading - and in some cases even improving - final model performance, while preserving policy entropy.
Efficient RL Training for LLMs with Experience Replay
arXiv (Cornell University) · 2026-04-09
preprintOpen accessWhile Experience Replay - the practice of storing rollouts and reusing them multiple times during training - is a foundational technique in general RL, it remains largely unexplored in LLM post-training due to the prevailing belief that fresh, on-policy data is essential for high performance. In this work, we challenge this assumption. We present a systematic study of replay buffers for LLM post-training, formalizing the optimal design as a trade-off between staleness-induced variance, sample diversity and the high computational cost of generation. We show that strict on-policy sampling is suboptimal when generation is expensive. Empirically, we show that a well-designed replay buffer can drastically reduce inference compute without degrading - and in some cases even improving - final model performance, while preserving policy entropy.
Likelihood-Based Reward Designs for General LLM Reasoning
Open MIND · 2026-02-03
preprintFine-tuning large language models (LLMs) on reasoning benchmarks via reinforcement learning requires a specific reward function, often binary, for each benchmark. This comes with two potential limitations: the need to design the reward, and the potentially sparse nature of binary rewards. Here, we systematically investigate rewards derived from the probability or log-probability of emitting the reference answer (or any other prompt continuation present in the data), which have the advantage of not relying on specific verifiers and being available at scale. Several recent works have advocated for the use of similar rewards (e.g., VeriFree, JEPO, RLPR, NOVER). We systematically compare variants of likelihood-based rewards with standard baselines, testing performance both on standard mathematical reasoning benchmarks, and on long-form answers where no external verifier is available. We find that using the log-probability of the reference answer as the reward for chain-of-thought (CoT) learning is the only option that performs well in all setups. This reward is also consistent with the next-token log-likelihood loss used during pretraining. In verifiable settings, log-probability rewards bring comparable or better success rates than reinforcing with standard binary rewards, and yield much better perplexity. In non-verifiable settings, they perform on par with SFT. On the other hand, methods based on probability, such as VeriFree, flatline on non-verifiable settings due to vanishing probabilities of getting the correct answer. Overall, this establishes log-probability rewards as a viable method for CoT fine-tuning, bridging the short, verifiable and long, non-verifiable answer settings.
Likelihood-Based Reward Designs for General LLM Reasoning
arXiv (Cornell University) · 2026-02-03
articleOpen accessFine-tuning large language models (LLMs) on reasoning benchmarks via reinforcement learning requires a specific reward function, often binary, for each benchmark. This comes with two potential limitations: the need to design the reward, and the potentially sparse nature of binary rewards. Here, we systematically investigate rewards derived from the probability or log-probability of emitting the reference answer (or any other prompt continuation present in the data), which have the advantage of not relying on specific verifiers and being available at scale. Several recent works have advocated for the use of similar rewards (e.g., VeriFree, JEPO, RLPR, NOVER). We systematically compare variants of likelihood-based rewards with standard baselines, testing performance both on standard mathematical reasoning benchmarks, and on long-form answers where no external verifier is available. We find that using the log-probability of the reference answer as the reward for chain-of-thought (CoT) learning is the only option that performs well in all setups. This reward is also consistent with the next-token log-likelihood loss used during pretraining. In verifiable settings, log-probability rewards bring comparable or better success rates than reinforcing with standard binary rewards, and yield much better perplexity. In non-verifiable settings, they perform on par with SFT. On the other hand, methods based on probability, such as VeriFree, flatline on non-verifiable settings due to vanishing probabilities of getting the correct answer. Overall, this establishes log-probability rewards as a viable method for CoT fine-tuning, bridging the short, verifiable and long, non-verifiable answer settings.
OpenApps: Simulating Environment Variations to Measure UI-Agent Reliability
ArXiv.org · 2025-11-25
preprintOpen accessReliability is key to realizing the promise of autonomous UI-Agents, multimodal agents that directly interact with apps in the same manner as humans, as users must be able to trust an agent to complete a given task. Current evaluations rely on fixed environments, often clones of existing apps, which are limited in that they can only shed light on whether or how often an agent can complete a task within a specific environment. When deployed however, agents are likely to encounter variations in app design and content that can affect an agent's ability to complete a task. To address this blind spot of measuring agent reliability across app variations, we develop OpenApps, a light-weight open-source ecosystem with six apps (messenger, calendar, maps, etc.) that are configurable in appearance and content. OpenApps requires just a single CPU to run, enabling easy generation and deployment of thousands of versions of each app. Specifically, we run more than 10,000 independent evaluations to study reliability across seven leading multimodal agents. We find that while standard reliability within a fixed app is relatively stable, reliability can vary drastically when measured across app variations. Task success rates for many agents can fluctuate by more than $50\%$ across app variations. For example, Kimi-VL-3B's average success across all tasks fluctuates from $63\%$ to just $4\%$ across app versions. We also find agent behaviors such as looping or hallucinating actions can differ drastically depending on the environment configuration. These initial findings highlight the importance of measuring reliability along this new dimension of app variations. OpenApps is available at https://facebookresearch.github.io/OpenApps/
Don't Waste Mistakes: Leveraging Negative RL-Groups via Confidence Reweighting
ArXiv.org · 2025-10-09
preprintOpen accessSenior authorReinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has become a standard recipe for improving large language models (LLMs) on reasoning tasks, with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) widely used in practice. Yet GRPO wastes substantial compute on negative groups: groups in which no sampled response is correct yield zero advantage and thus no gradient. We ask whether negative groups can be leveraged without extra supervision. Starting from a maximum-likelihood (MLE) objective in reward modeling, we show that the MLE gradient is equivalent to a policy gradient for a modified value function. This value function adds a confidence-weighted penalty on incorrect responses, imposing larger penalties on more confident mistakes. We refer to this as \textbf{L}ikelihood \textbf{E}stimation with \textbf{N}egative \textbf{S}amples (\textbf{LENS}). LENS modifies GRPO to assign non-zero, confidence-dependent rewards to incorrect generations, making negative groups informative and converting previously wasted samples into useful gradient updates. On the MATH benchmark with Llama-3.1-8B and Qwen-2.5-3B, the proposed variant consistently outperforms GRPO baseline, with significant gains on harder items. These results demonstrate a principled and practical way to "rescue" negative groups, improving efficiency and performance in RLVR.
What Characterizes Effective Reasoning? Revisiting Length, Review, and Structure of CoT
ArXiv.org · 2025-09-23
preprintOpen accessLarge reasoning models (LRMs) spend substantial test-time compute on long chain-of-thought (CoT) traces, but what *characterizes* an effective CoT remains unclear. While prior work reports gains from lengthening CoTs and increasing review (revisiting earlier steps) via appended *wait* tokens, recent studies suggest that shorter thinking can outperform longer traces. We therefore conduct a systematic evaluation across ten LRMs on math and scientific reasoning. Contrary to the "longer-is-better" narrative, we find that both naive CoT lengthening and increased review are associated with *lower* accuracy. As CoT unfolds step by step, token-level metrics can conflate verbosity with process quality. We introduce a graph view of CoT to extract structure and identify a single statistic-the *Failed-Step Fraction (FSF)*, the fraction of steps in abandoned branches-that consistently outpredicts length and review ratio for correctness across models. To probe causality, we design two interventions. First, we rank candidate CoTs by each metric at test time, where FSF yields the largest pass@1 gains; second, we edit CoTs to remove failed branches, which significantly improves accuracy, indicating that failed branches bias subsequent reasoning. Taken together, these results characterize effective CoTs as those that *fail less* and support *structure-aware* test-time scaling over indiscriminately generating long CoT.
Tuning without Peeking: Provable Generalization Bounds and Robust LLM Post-Training
arXiv (Cornell University) · 2025-07-02
preprintOpen accessGradient-based optimization is the workhorse of deep learning, offering efficient and scalable training via backpropagation. However, exposing gradients during training can leak sensitive information about the underlying data, raising privacy and security concerns such as susceptibility to data poisoning attacks. In contrast, black box optimization methods, which treat the model as an opaque function, relying solely on function evaluations to guide optimization, offer a promising alternative in scenarios where data access is restricted, adversarial risks are high, or overfitting is a concern. This paper introduces BBoxER, an evolutionary black-box method for LLM post-training that induces an information bottleneck via implicit compression of the training data. Leveraging the tractability of information flow, we provide non-vacuous generalization bounds and strong theoretical guarantees for privacy, robustness to data poisoning attacks, and extraction attacks. In experiments with LLMs, we demonstrate empirically that black-box optimization methods, despite the scalability and computational challenges inherent to black-box approaches, are able to learn, showing how a few iterations of BBoxER improve performance, generalize well on a benchmark of reasoning datasets, and are robust to membership inference attacks. This positions BBoxER as an attractive add-on on top of gradient-based optimization, offering suitability for deployment in restricted or privacy-sensitive environments while also providing non-vacuous generalization guarantees.
PILAF: Optimal Human Preference Sampling for Reward Modeling
ArXiv.org · 2025-02-06
preprintOpen accessAs large language models increasingly drive real-world applications, aligning them with human values becomes paramount. Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has emerged as a key technique, translating preference data into reward models when oracle human values remain inaccessible. In practice, RLHF mostly relies on approximate reward models, which may not consistently guide the policy toward maximizing the underlying human values. We propose Policy-Interpolated Learning for Aligned Feedback (PILAF), a novel response sampling strategy for preference labeling that explicitly aligns preference learning with maximizing the underlying oracle reward. PILAF is theoretically grounded, demonstrating optimality from both an optimization and a statistical perspective. The method is straightforward to implement and demonstrates strong performance in iterative and online RLHF settings where feedback curation is critical.
Asymmetric REINFORCE for off-Policy Reinforcement Learning: Balancing positive and negative rewards
ArXiv.org · 2025-06-25
preprintOpen accessReinforcement learning (RL) is increasingly used to align large language models (LLMs). Off-policy methods offer greater implementation simplicity and data efficiency than on-policy techniques, but often result in suboptimal performance. In this work, we study the intermediate range of algorithms between off-policy RL and supervised fine-tuning by analyzing a simple off-policy REINFORCE algorithm, where the advantage is defined as $A=r-V$, with $r$ a reward and $V$ some tunable baseline. Intuitively, lowering $V$ emphasizes high-reward samples, while raising it penalizes low-reward ones more heavily. We first provide a theoretical analysis of this off-policy REINFORCE algorithm, showing that when the baseline $V$ lower-bounds the expected reward, the algorithm enjoys a policy improvement guarantee. Our analysis reveals that while on-policy updates can safely leverage both positive and negative signals, off-policy updates benefit from focusing more on positive rewards than on negative ones. We validate our findings experimentally in a controlled stochastic bandit setting and through fine-tuning state-of-the-art LLMs on reasoning tasks.
Frequent coauthors
- 33 shared
K. Birgitta Whaley
University of California, Berkeley
- 26 shared
Oded Regev
New York University
- 24 shared
Ronald de Wolf
KU Leuven
- 18 shared
Thomas Vidick
- 16 shared
Dave Bacon
- 16 shared
Dmitry Gavinsky
Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Mathematics
- 15 shared
Sevag Gharibian
- 14 shared
Dorit Aharonov
Awards & honors
- Julius Silver, Roslyn S. Silver, and Enid Silver Winslow Pro…
- Fellow of Asia-Pacific Artificial Intelligence Association (…
- Academia Europaea (elected member) (2018)
- Knight (Chevalier) in the National Order of Merit (Ordre de…
- Femme en Or de la Recherche, France — Awarded yearly to one…
- Resume-aware match score
- Save to shortlist
- AI-drafted outreach
See your match with Julia Kempe
PhdFit ranks faculty by your research interests, methods, and publications — grounded in their actual work, not templates.
- Free to start
- No credit card
- 30-second signup