Nemo Rl Auto Research
NVIDIAOfficialPublished by NVIDIA
- Skill
- Workflow
- Software development
- Apache-2.0
- Medium risk
AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
The nemo-rl-auto-research skill provides a structured, autonomous workflow for conducting hypothesis-driven research in NeMo-RL and NeMo-gym environments. It manages the full experiment lifecycle, including environment inspection, baseline establishment, iterative testing, and result logging. The skill enforces reproducibility by using git branches for every experiment and maintaining a centralized TSV ledger for tracking metrics, resource usage, and campaign progress. It is designed for directed discovery and hypothesis testing, requiring human oversight for planning and approval of compute-intensive tasks.
What it does
- Automates the execution of iterative RL research experiments.
- Maintains a git-based research ledger with branch-per-experiment tracking.
- Logs experiment metrics, resource usage, and status in a structured TSV format.
- Enforces user-defined stop conditions like experiment counts or time budgets.
- Supports various execution environments including local, Slurm, and Kubernetes.
- Provides progress updates and result summaries throughout the campaign.
When to use it
- When running long-term research campaigns for NeMo-RL or NeMo-gym.
- When testing specific hypotheses regarding model accuracy, reward, or throughput.
- When you need to systematically explore recipe variations while maintaining reproducibility.
- When you require a structured way to track and log multiple experimental iterations.
Advantages
- Ensures reproducibility through strict git branching and logging practices.
- Reduces manual overhead in managing experiment lifecycles and metric collection.
- Provides clear visibility into campaign progress and stop conditions.
- Prevents accidental loss of work by isolating experiments into separate branches.
- Enables data-driven decision making by centralizing results in a searchable ledger.
Usage examples
- “Run 20 experiments to improve the validation accuracy of the current dapo-qwen2.5 recipe.”
- The agent will initialize a campaign, create a baseline, and iteratively test 20 variations, logging results to the TSV and stopping once the count is reached.
- “Conduct a 5-hour research campaign testing different rollout batch sizes for the current model.”
- The agent will calculate a deadline, execute experiments within the time limit, and provide status updates on remaining time and progress.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/nvidia/nemo-rl-auto-research/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip nemo-rl-auto-research.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by NVIDIA
Auto Research
Run iterative NeMo-RL experiments in this repository against the user's stated objective, such as accuracy, reward, throughput, latency, stability, or another recipe-specific metric, with git as the research ledger.
Treat dependencies as ready, but choose the runtime deliberately. Use the recipe's authoritative metric as the source of truth. Keep changes small, reproducible, and simple. Preserve unrelated user work.
Safety: This skill creates git branches, writes files to disk, and executes shell commands including training jobs that may consume GPU resources. Always confirm the campaign plan with the user before creating branches or launching jobs. Do not execute destructive git operations (reset, force-push) or launch compute-intensive jobs without explicit user approval.
Use the nemo-rl-session-memory skill for every auto-research campaign. Start or resume a session record before branching, then checkpoint after forming the plan, before and after meaningful edits or long-running launches, when the user changes direction, and before handoff or final summary.
After context compaction, handoff, disconnect, or a long gap, reload this skill and any companion skills already in use, read the latest nemo-rl-session-memory handoff, and restate the overall objective, stop rules, current branch, and latest result before continuing. Treat follow-up steering as additive unless the user explicitly changes the main objective.
Workflow
Inspect the current git state and identify unrelated user changes before branching.
Use a shared branch prefix. Prefer a user-provided one; otherwise create a suggestive default such as
autoresearch/2026-03-24-dapo-qwen2p5.Read the target recipe, its parents, and the relevant code paths in
examples/run_grpo.py,nemo_rl/models/,nemo_rl/algorithms/,nemo_rl/environments/, anddocs/. For NeMo-gym recipes, also inspectexamples/nemo_gym/entrypoints, configs, and launch scripts.Translate any user stop rule into explicit values you can monitor, such as the requested number of experiments as
target_experiment_count,campaign_deadline,per_experiment_timeout, ortarget_metric.Verify required data, checkpoints, runtime inputs, and the launcher.
Create an untracked TSV log and per-experiment log directory.
Run a baseline first on
<prefix>/baselineif none exists.
For GPU, CPU-heavy, distributed, or long-running work, choose the execution environment deliberately. Run locally when the current machine has suitable GPUs and capacity; otherwise follow the user's requested environment, use launch-nemo-rl for nrl-k8s/Kubernetes, use the environment's native launcher for Slurm, or clarify with the user before launching. Use CPU-only local runs only for light inspection, dry runs, and short non-GPU checks.
If the user mentions Brev, or if /home/ubuntu/RL exists and /ephemeral is available as a volume, treat the machine as a Brev instance and use nemo-rl-brev-etiquette before creating experiment directories, caches, logs, checkpoints, or authenticated runtime state.
Branching
Put every experiment on its own branch under the shared prefix.
Keep every branch, even for failed or weak ideas.
Put at least one commit on each branch for the hypothesis.
Add follow-up fix commits on the same branch when a rerun is justified.
Never stash, reset, or overwrite unrelated user changes silently. If dirty files overlap the experiment, use a separate worktree or ask before proceeding.
See references/git-workflow.md for the exact pattern.
Loop
Pick one concrete hypothesis.
Create a branch such as
autoresearch/2026-03-24-dapo-qwen2p5/prompt-compact-schema.Edit the smallest set of files needed.
Commit the hypothesis.
Before launching the run, check the monitored stop conditions. Do not stop early unless one is already clearly met.
Identify the authoritative metric source from the recipe or logging code, then run with a unique log path:
LOG_DIR=reports/auto_research/<campaign>/<experiment>
mkdir -p "$LOG_DIR"
uv run <entrypoint> > "$LOG_DIR/run.log" 2>&1If the user gave a per-experiment wall-clock limit, enforce it explicitly. Prefer a recipe-level timeout when one already exists; otherwise wrap the command with an external timeout. If both exist, honor the tighter limit.
Extract the primary metric with a command appropriate for the actual log format. If extraction is empty, inspect the last log lines and the recipe's logging path before marking the run.
Record index, branch, parent commit, commit, recipe, metric name, metric value, memory (GB), elapsed time (minutes), launcher, job id, command, log path, status, and description in the TSV, along with enough timing or count information to evaluate the stop rule.
Periodically print user-facing progress updates during the campaign. Include the current branch, latest known result, attempted experiment count, remaining experiment count if applicable, remaining campaign time if applicable, and whether any stop condition has been met yet.
Re-check the monitored stop conditions after the experiment completes and state the result explicitly, for example
stop condition not yet met: 17/24 attempted, 6h12m remainingorstop condition met: 24/24 attempted.Mark the result as
keep,discard, orcrash, then move to the next branch unless a user-specified stop condition has been clearly met.
For count-based stop rules, count attempted ideas, not only successful or fully completed runs.
For campaign time budgets, convert the user limit into an absolute deadline at the start of the campaign and keep checking remaining time.
For per-experiment budgets, enforce a timeout on every run and treat overruns as failures.
Examples:
do 50 experiments: stop only after 50 attempted experiment rows exist in the TSV10h total, 1h each: enforce a 1 hour limit per run and stop when the 10 hour campaign budget is reached, or when there is not enough remaining budget to start another 1 hour run50 experiments or 10h total, 1h each: monitor all three values, never exceed the per-run cap, and stop only when one campaign-level stop trigger is clearly reached
Priorities
Prefer ideas with high expected objective gain and low complexity cost:
correctness and backend compatibility
prompt and rollout formatting
batch, sequence, and precision layout
optimizer and scheduler tuning
reward shaping, clipping, or scaling
dataset mix or validation changes
synchronous versus asynchronous execution based on hardware
All else equal, prefer simpler wins and avoid brittle hardware-specific hacks.
Avoid
Do not conclude a training idea failed from an underpowered smoke run. If a run uses tiny batch sizes, very few optimizer steps, or otherwise non-representative settings, treat it as plumbing validation only; scale to a meaningful batch size and train long enough to test the hypothesis before marking it
discard.Do not repeatedly pay batch-scheduler setup costs for tight edit-run-debug loops. If Slurm batch jobs have a large startup tax and failures require quick iteration, use the documented interactive Slurm pattern or ask the user before resubmitting more batch jobs.
Do not let context compaction or follow-up steering questions erase the original campaign goal. Refresh
nemo-rl-session-memory, reload active skills, and preserve the main objective unless the user explicitly changes it.
Stop
If the user gives explicit stopping conditions, they override the generic rule. Do not stop because the search feels sufficient; stop only when the requested count, deadline, budget, or target condition has been clearly met.
During the campaign, explicitly inform the user whether the stop condition has been met. If not, report the remaining count, remaining time, or other remaining threshold in concrete terms.
If the user does not give explicit stopping conditions, run the baseline plus up to three low-risk experiments, then summarize the best result and ask before continuing.
References
references/git-workflow.mdfor branch, dirty-worktree, parent-commit, and baseline rules.references/exploration-ideas.mdfor turning symptoms into concrete hypotheses.references/experiment-log-template.mdfor the TSV schema and reproducibility fields.
Files
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer841 B
- BENCHMARK.md4.2 KiB
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer11.2 KiB
- SKILL.md9.0 KiB
- evals/evals.json3.1 KiB
- references/experiment-log-template.md2.5 KiB
- references/exploration-ideas.md5.5 KiB
- references/git-workflow.md3.8 KiB
- skill-card.md4.0 KiB
- skill.oms.sig5.2 KiB
references/exploration-ideas.md
Exploration Ideas
Use this file to turn symptoms into concrete hypotheses.
First Read The Bottleneck
Low accuracy but stable training usually points to prompt, reward, data, or generation settings.
Unstable loss, NaNs, or erratic rewards usually point to precision, optimizer, sequence length, or backend issues.
Low GPU utilization or long idle phases usually point to batching, backend, colocated versus non-colocated execution, or async design.
Good train-side metrics but weak validation usually point to prompt mismatch, reward misspecification, or validation/data issues.
Prompt And Rollout Format
Look here when the model seems to misunderstand the task or the evaluator prefers strict structure.
Try:
removing boilerplate so more tokens are available for task content
enforcing a stricter answer schema with explicit delimiters or section markers
comparing terse prompts against explicit reasoning scaffolds
aligning stop tokens and response markers with the expected output format
pairing prompt edits with
max_new_tokensand sequence length so formatting gains are not confused with context-budget gains
Watch:
answer-format drift
truncated completions
reward variance across equivalent prompts
improvements that vanish when prompt length changes again
Batch, Sequence, And Precision
Look here when runs are stable but slow, memory-bound, or noisy.
Try:
raising microbatch size until memory or instability becomes the limiter
trading gradient accumulation against rollout batch size
changing
max_total_sequence_length, prompt length, andmax_new_tokenstogether instead of in isolationtesting sequence packing when padding waste is high
comparing bf16 and fp16, especially when fp16 shows overflow or reward instability
Watch:
tokens per second
peak memory
reward variance
whether larger batches reduce useful on-policy freshness
Synchronous Training
Use synchronous training when GPU count is modest and strict step-to-step freshness matters most.
Try:
modest increases in per-device batch size
tensor, pipeline, and context parallel changes only when the model size justifies the overhead
retuning learning rate and warmup after changing batch layout
backend comparisons across Megatron, DTensor, and automodel when the recipe supports them
Favor it when:
one to four GPUs
stable collective communication
the main bottleneck is learner quality rather than actor throughput
Asynchronous Training
Use async ideas when throughput, not optimizer quality, is the main bottleneck.
Try:
splitting actor and learner work when generation stalls the trainer
reserving some GPUs for rollouts and the rest for updates
overlapping sampling and optimization when one side is idle
testing
max_trajectory_age_stepsand related freshness controls if stale data is hurting quality
Watch:
whether generation waits on optimization or vice versa
whether throughput gains are offset by staler policy data
whether the recipe already disables features that your async plan depends on
Backend And Correctness
Look here early because correctness fixes can dominate any tuning win.
Try:
fixing shared compatibility layers instead of recipe-only workarounds
comparing backend-specific code paths when one backend underperforms unexpectedly
checking generation backends, attention implementations, and logprob paths when metrics look suspicious
Watch:
mismatched train versus generation behavior
backend-specific crashes
silent metric regressions after switching frameworks
Reward And Data
Look here when completions seem reasonable but the metric does not move.
Try:
reward scaling, clipping, or shaping adjustments
validation split changes when the current signal is too noisy
dataset mix changes when the recipe may be underfeeding the target behavior
prompt-template changes that better match the reward model or evaluator
Watch:
reward saturation
zero-variance rewards
improvements in train reward that do not transfer to validation
Resource Heuristics
Use the available hardware to prune the search space.
On 1 GPU, prioritize prompt, reward, precision, optimizer, and sequence layout.
On 2 to 4 GPUs, compare simple synchronous scaling against modest parallelism.
On 8 or more GPUs, explicitly test whether actor-learner partitioning beats strict lockstep execution.
Crash Triage
Use failures to narrow the search space instead of repeating them blindly.
If the crash is a typo, missing import, or obvious shape mismatch introduced by the current experiment, fix it and rerun.
If the crash is an OOM, first try reducing the most recent memory-expanding change before abandoning the whole axis.
If the crash comes from backend incompatibility, prefer fixing the shared compatibility layer instead of adding a one-off recipe workaround.
If the idea keeps failing after a few sensible fixes, log it as
crashand move on.
Hypothesis Templates
Turn these into commit-scoped experiments:
Prompt: replace verbose instructions with a compact answer schema and stricter delimiters.Batching: raise microbatch size and lower grad accumulation to improve throughput at similar memory.Precision: switch fp16 to bf16 before changing model scale or rollout count.Backend: compare DTensor, Megatron, or automodel to separate tuning effects from framework effects.Async: split actor and learner resources if rollout latency is leaving GPUs idle.Reward: retune scaling or clipping when completions look better than the score suggests.
Requirements and compatibility
Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta
“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.
Needs: Needs Python
Security
What our scanner noticed· Medium risk
- Large base64-encoded blobs
A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.
Attribution and licence
- Published by
- NVIDIA
- Publisher
- NVIDIA (Official)
- Source
- NVIDIA/skills · skills/nemo-rl-auto-research · commit fce3cca
- Licence
- Apache License 2.0 (redistribution allowed)
- LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE-APACHE)
- ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
- Synced
AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by NVIDIA or NVIDIA.
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download nemo-rl-auto-research.zip