arXiv (All)
open access
Hacking or Just Failing? A More Capable LLM Monitor Better Separates Reward Hacking from Honest Failure
An agent's visible score can exceed its real progress because it gamed the score or because it simply made mistakes, so a useful reward-hacking monitor must tell the two apart. We built a sandboxed task in which an agent can game a completion score, labelled every episode by replaying it and repairi
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Emergent Collusion in Long-Horizon LLM Agent Interaction#1051361
- Emergent Collusion in Long-Horizon LLM Agent Interaction#1028732
- The Unreliable Progress Bar: Can LLM Agents Reliably Report Task Progress Throughout Execution?#985929
- Agent Evaluation Reliability: More Tasks Won't (Always) Fix An Agent Leaderboard#1155586
- Testing-Driven Reliability Audit of Trajectory-Based Early Outcome Prediction for LLM Agents: Target-Specific Calibration Transfer Persists Within a Single Benchmark#1061283
Record · ID 1536238
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive