arXiv:2607. 16451v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Chat models sometimes commit to an answer and then produce reasoning that justifies it rather than deriving it -- even when the answer contradicts a task premise.
By Heejin Jo
arXiv:2607. 18966v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language models trained with reinforcement learning may learn to optimize the grader's judgment rather than the intended objective.
By Axel H{\o}jmark, J\'er\'emy Scheurer, Evgenia Nitishinskaya, Felix Hofst\"atter, Jason Wolfe, Theodore Ehrenborg, Bronson Schoen, Alexander Meinke
arXiv:2608. 13564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating language-model agents at scale increasingly relies on a second language model as an automatic judge, because the gold signal, an executable environment reward, is expensive, slow, or unavailable at deployment time.
By Darragh Quinn, David Dylan, Roisin Healy, Fionn Carroll, Maeve Donnelly, Cormac Sheehan
arXiv:2606. 07834v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM judges increasingly turn verdicts into system commitments.
By Haoran Xu
arXiv:2606. 30627v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Conservative offline training is widely advocated as a safe foundation for subsequent online adaptation: if a policy stays close to well-supported behaviour, the argument goes, it is less likely to exploit imperfections in a learned reward model.
By Subramanyam Sahoo, Aman Chadha, Vinija Jain, Divya Chaudhary
arXiv:2606. 30383v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A rapidly growing class of LLM agents is multi-party: the agent acts for a principal (who briefs it, sends follow-ups, and receives results) while also conversing in a separate channel with a counterparty whose interests may diverge (negotiating with a vendor, screening inbound requests, or mediating between employees).
By Bojie Li, Noah Shi