arXiv:2604. 23488v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reward hacking in code generation, where models exploit evaluation loopholes to obtain high reward without correctly solving the intended task, poses a critical challenge for Reinforcement Learning (RL) and the deployment of reasoning models.
arXiv:2604. 23488v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reward hacking in code generation, where models exploit evaluation loopholes to obtain high reward without correctly solving the intended task, poses a critical challenge for Reinforcement Learning (RL) and the deployment of reasoning models.
arXiv:2604. 01476v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reinforcement learning for LLMs is vulnerable to reward hacking, where models exploit shortcuts to maximize reward without solving the intended task.
arXiv:2606. 04923v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Rubric-based reinforcement learning (RL) uses an LLM-as-a-Judge (LaaJ) to score model outputs according to rubrics as rewards.
arXiv:2606. 12016v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Model post-training, and in particular reinforcement learning (RL), is one of the primary mechanisms by which developers can shape models' values and behaviors.
arXiv:2606. 09711v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reward hacking is usually studied after it becomes visible, once a model earns high proxy reward while failing the intended task.
arXiv:2606. 26300v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A classical intuition holds that verifying a solution is easier than producing one.
arXiv:2606. 04075v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a dominant post-training paradigm, enabling large language models (LLMs) to learn from rewards.
arXiv:2607. 09492v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning (RL) is increasingly used to align multimodal large language models (MLLMs), but higher rewards do not always imply better task performance.
arXiv:2606. 06223v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language-model agents act through repeated cycles of observation, reasoning, and action selection, making safety monitoring depend on both internal model state and environment context.
Language-model agents act through repeated cycles of observation, reasoning, and action selection, making safety monitoring depend on both internal model state and environment context. We study reward-hacking monitors in ReAct-style agents acting in Gameable ALFWorld and WebShop.
arXiv:2602. 12124v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: While most AI alignment research focuses on preventing models from generating explicitly harmful content, a more subtle risk arises from capability-seeking RL training in vulnerable environments.
As large language models (LLMs) are deployed in high-stakes domains, adversaries may poison training data to implant backdoors: hidden triggers that covertly manipulate model behavior at inference time. We ask whether a defender can recover such a trigger under realistic affordances, namely white-box access to the weights and knowledge of the behavior of concern, but no training data, no trusted reference model, no knowledge of the trigger, and no certainty that the model is poisoned.