arXiv:2606. 24622v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training safe Reinforcement Learning (RL) systems is inherently challenging, with no guarantee of avoiding unwanted behaviors.
By Andreas Chouliaras, Luke Connolly, Dimitris Chatzpoulos
Training safe Reinforcement Learning (RL) systems is inherently challenging, with no guarantee of avoiding unwanted behaviors. The most effective defenses against this are (i) transparency through explainability and (ii) alignment via human feedback.
arXiv:2607. 05773v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) evolve into autonomous agents, traditional static evaluation fails to capture multi-step decision-making.
By Akshay Arora, Ishan Nigam, Ashutosh Aggarwal, Shefali Bansal, Krishna Singh, Sweta Kumari, Nikhil Mittal, Shariq Farhan, Siddarth Malreddy
arXiv:2608. 04934v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Training LLM agents commonly relies on supervised fine-tuning from expert trajectories or online reinforcement learning over human-specified tasks with handcrafted verifiers.
By Xuanyu Lei, Yiqi Zhu, Chenliang Li, Kaiming Liu, Peng Li, Ming Yan, Jieping Ye, Ya-Qin Zhang, Yang Liu
arXiv:2607. 21419v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In long-horizon LLM agent reinforcement learning, weak policies often repeat similar failures, producing uninformative rollout trajectories and limiting effective policy optimization.
By Yipeng Shi, Zhipeng Ma, Yue Wang, Qitai Tan, Yang Li, Peng Chen, Zhengzhou Zhu
Training LLM agents commonly relies on supervised fine-tuning from expert trajectories or online reinforcement learning over human-specified tasks with handcrafted verifiers. Though effective, both remain bottlenecked by externally specified tasks and supervision signals, limiting the scalability and diversity of agent training.