CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 07, 2026

When Adaptive Rewards Hurt: Causal Probing and the Switching-Stability Dilemma in LLM-Guided LEO Satellite Scheduling

arXiv AI Archived Apr 07, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.03562v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Adaptive reward design for deep reinforcement learning (DRL) in multi-beam LEO satellite scheduling is motivated by the intuition that regime-aware reward weights should outperform static ones. We systematically test this intuition and uncover a switching-stability dilemma: near-constant reward weights (342.1 Mbps) outperform carefully-tuned dynamic weights (103.3+/-96.8 Mbps) because PPO requires a quasistationary reward signal for value function

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 4 Apr 2026] When Adaptive Rewards Hurt: Causal Probing and the Switching-Stability Dilemma in LLM-Guided LEO Satellite Scheduling Yuanhang Li Adaptive reward design for deep reinforcement learning (DRL) in multi-beam LEO satellite scheduling is motivated by the intuition that regime-aware reward weights should outperform static ones. We systematically test this intuition and uncover a switching-stability dilemma: near-constant reward weights (342.1 Mbps) outperform carefully-tuned dynamic weights (103.3+/-96.8 Mbps) because PPO requires a quasistationary reward signal for value function convergence. Weight adaptation-regardless of quality-degrades performance by repeatedly restarting convergence. To understand why specific weights matter, we introduce a single-variable causal probing method that independently perturbs each reward term by +/-20% and measures PPO response after 50k steps. Probing reveals counterintuitive leverage: a +20% increase in the switching penalty yields +157 Mbps for polar handover and +130 Mbps for hot-cold regimes-findings inaccessible to human experts or trained MLPs without systematic probing. We evaluate four MDP architect variants (fixed, rule-based, learned MLP, finetuned LLM) across known and novel traffic regimes. The MLP achieves 357.9 Mbps on known regimes and 325.2 Mbps on novel regimes, while the fine-tuned LLM collapses to 45.3+/-43.0 Mbps due to weight oscillation rather than lack of domain knowledge-output consistency, not knowledge, is the binding constraint. Our findings provide an empirically-grounded roadmap for LLM-DRL integration in communication systems, identifying where LLMs add irreplaceable value (natural language intent understanding) versus where simpler methods suffice. Comments: 8 pages, 3 figures Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2604.03562 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2604.03562v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.03562 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Yuanhang Li [view email] [v1] Sat, 4 Apr 2026 03:04:53 UTC (51 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 07, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 07, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗