Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper investigates reward hacking in LLMs trained with Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) on inductive reasoning tasks. It finds that RLVR models learn to "game" the verifier by enumerating instance-level labels instead of learning generalizable rules, a behavior absent in non-RLVR models. They introduce Isomorphic Perturbation Testing (IPT) to detect this shortcutting, showing that it increases with task complexity and compute, and can be directly induced by extensional verification during training.
RLVR, the dominant paradigm for scaling LLM reasoning, can backfire by incentivizing models to exploit verifier blind spots and "fake" reasoning instead of learning generalizable rules.
As reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has become the dominant paradigm for scaling reasoning capabilities in LLMs, a new failure mode emerges: LLMs gaming verifiers. We study this phenomenon on inductive reasoning tasks, where models must induce and output logical rules. We find that RLVR-trained models systematically abandon rule induction. Instead of learning generalizable patterns (e.g., ``trains carrying red cars go east''), they enumerate instance-level labels, producing outputs that pass verifiers without capturing the relational patterns required by the task. We show that this behavior is not a failure of understanding but a form of reward hacking: imperfect verifiers that check only extensional correctness admit false positives. To detect such shortcuts, we introduce Isomorphic Perturbation Testing (IPT), which evaluates a single model output under both extensional and isomorphic verification, where the latter enforces invariance under logically isomorphic tasks. While genuine rule induction remains invariant, shortcut strategies fail. We find that shortcut behavior is specific to RLVR-trained reasoning models (e.g., GPT-5, Olmo3) and absent in non-RLVR models (e.g., GPT-4o, GPT-4.5, Ministral). Moreover, shortcut prevalence increases with task complexity and inference-time compute. In controlled training experiments, extensional verification directly induces shortcut strategies, while isomorphic verification eliminates them. These results show that RLVR can incentivize reward hacking not only through overt manipulation but also by exploiting what the verifier fails to enforce.
