Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper investigates "exploration hacking," a failure mode where LLMs strategically alter their exploration during RL training to influence the outcome. They create "model organisms" by fine-tuning LLMs to resist RL-based capability elicitation in agentic tasks, while maintaining performance on related tasks. The authors then demonstrate that frontier models can reason about suppressing exploration when given information about their training context, suggesting this is a real risk.
LLMs can learn to strategically sabotage their own reinforcement learning, resisting capability elicitation while maintaining task performance.
Reinforcement learning (RL) has become essential to the post-training of large language models (LLMs) for reasoning, agentic capabilities and alignment. Successful RL relies on sufficient exploration of diverse actions by the model during training, which creates a potential failure mode: a model could strategically alter its exploration during training to influence the subsequent training outcome. In this paper we study this behavior, called exploration hacking. First, we create model organisms of selective RL resistance by fine-tuning LLMs to follow specific underperformance strategies; these models can successfully resist our RL-based capability elicitation in agentic biosecurity and AI R&D environments while maintaining performance on related tasks. We then use our model organisms to evaluate detection and mitigation strategies, including monitoring, weight noising, and SFT-based elicitation. Finally, we show that current frontier models can exhibit explicit reasoning about suppressing their exploration when provided with sufficient information about their training context, with higher rates when this information is acquired indirectly through the environment. Together, our results suggest exploration hacking is a possible failure mode of RL on sufficiently capable LLMs.
