arXiv AI By Thanawat Lodkaew, Johannes Ackermann, Soichiro Nishimori, Nontawat Charoenphakdee, Masashi Sugiyama, Takashi Ishida

Do Coding Agents Deceive Us? Detecting and Preventing Cheating via Capped Evaluation with Randomized Tests

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2606. 07379v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A growing failure mode in agent evaluation and training is that models can achieve high evaluation scores by exploiting shortcuts instead of solving the intended task, producing deceptive performance.

Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 25

Do Prompt-Elicited Trajectories Reflect Training-Time Reward Hacking? A Systematic Study on Monitoring Trainig-Time Reward Hacking in Code Generation

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.

By Lichen Li, Hengguang Zhou, Yijun Liang, Tianyi Zhou, Cho-Jui Hsieh
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 4

Do Prompt-Elicited Trajectories Reflect Training-Time Reward Hacking? A Systematic Study on Monitoring Training-Time Reward Hacking in Code Generation

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.

By Lichen Li, Hengguang Zhou, Yijun Liang, Tianyi Zhou, Cho-Jui Hsieh