Do Synthetic Trajectories Reflect Real Reward Hacking? A Systematic Study on Monitoring In-the-Wild Hacking in Code Generation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.23488v1
• Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2026 01:26:50 GMT
• Title: Do Synthetic Trajectories Reflect Real Reward Hacking? A Systematic Study on Monitoring In-the-Wild Hacking in Code Generation
• Abstract summary: We present a systematic analysis of the synthetic vs. in-the-wild discrepancy in reward hacking.<n>We examine what extent hacking behaviors induced by prompting resemble those emerging during RL training.<n>We find that synthetic-data-trained monitors fail to generalize to "in-the-wild" hacking.
• Score: 53.024513172383195
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Reward hacking in code generation, where models exploit evaluation loopholes to obtain full reward without correctly solving the tasks, poses a critical challenge for Reinforcement Learning (RL) and the deployment of reasoning models. Existing studies have been conducted primarily on synthetic hacking trajectories. However, whether these synthetic behaviors faithfully represent naturally emerging hacking in the wild remains unclear. In this work, we present a systematic analysis of the synthetic vs. in-the-wild discrepancy in reward hacking. We examine to what extent hacking behaviors induced by prompting resemble those emerging during RL training, and whether monitors trained on synthetic trajectories generalize to naturally arising but previously unseen hacking. To scale up the curation of in-the-wild reward hacking trajectories, we modified Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) by injecting conflicting unit tests as tracers and applying a "resampling-until-hack" mechanism. Through controlled comparisons between monitors trained on synthetic versus in-the-wild data, we find that (1) synthetic-data-trained monitors fail to generalize to "in-the-wild" hacking, and (2) monitors trained on our "in-the-wild" trajectories demonstrate stronger generalizability to unseen hacking types. Our results indicate that synthetic reward hacking data may not fully reflect natural reward hacking behaviors, and that relying solely on synthetic data can lead to misleading conclusions. The codebase is available at https://github.com/LichenLillc/CoTMonitoring.git

Related papers

• Shallow Beliefs: Synthetic document finetuning does not inoculate against emergent misalignment from reward hacking [0.0]
  Recent work shows that models that learn to reward hack on RL environments can become broadly misaligned.<n>We ask whether synthetic document finetuning (SDF) can inoculate a model against future training we don't intervene on.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-14T04:05:29Z)
• Detecting and Suppressing Reward Hacking with Gradient Fingerprints [46.25008147178368]
  Fingerprint Gradient (GRIFT) is a method for detecting reward hacking using models' internal computations.<n>Across verifiable reasoning benchmarks, GRIFT substantially outperforms strong baselines.<n>Our results highlight a promising direction of leveraging gradient level representations for assessing the quality of CoT reasoning traces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-17T17:01:24Z)
• When Reward Hacking Rebounds: Understanding and Mitigating It with Representation-Level Signals [11.280037154530847]
  Reinforcement learning for LLMs is vulnerable to reward hacking.<n>We study this phenomenon in coding tasks using an environment-manipulation setting.<n>We propose Advantage Modification, which integrates shortcut concept scores into GRPO advantage computation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-01T23:33:08Z)
• Countdown-Code: A Testbed for Studying The Emergence and Generalization of Reward Hacking in RLVR [15.115899490498341]
  Reward hacking is a form of misalignment in which models overoptimize proxy rewards without genuinely solving the underlying task.<n>We introduce Countdown-Code, a minimal environment where models can both solve a mathematical reasoning task and manipulate the test harness.<n>We study reward hacking in open-weight LLMs and find that such behaviors can be unintentionally learned during supervised fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-07T07:43:14Z)
• IR$^3$: Contrastive Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Interpretable Detection and Mitigation of Reward Hacking [67.20568716300272]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) enables powerful LLM alignment but can introduce reward hacking.<n>We introduce IR3 (Interpretable Reward Reconstruction and Rectification), a framework that reverse-engineers, interprets, and surgically repairs the implicit objectives driving RLHF-tuned models.<n>We show that IR3 achieves 0.89 correlation with ground-truth rewards, identifies hacking features with over 90% precision, and significantly reduces hacking behaviors while maintaining capabilities within 3% of the original model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T01:14:53Z)
• Adversarial Reward Auditing for Active Detection and Mitigation of Reward Hacking [69.06218054848803]
  We propose Adrial Reward Auditing (ARA), a framework that reconceptualizes reward hacking as a dynamic, competitive game.<n>ARA operates in two stages: first, a Hacker policy discovers reward model vulnerabilities while an Auditor learns to detect exploitation from latent representations.<n>ARA achieves the best alignment-utility tradeoff among all baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T07:34:57Z)
• Natural Emergent Misalignment from Reward Hacking in Production RL [17.469417853456328]
  We show that when large language models learn to reward hack on production RL environments, this can result in egregious emergent misalignment.<n>We start with a pretrained model, impart knowledge of reward hacking strategies via synthetic document finetuning or prompting, and train on a selection of real Anthropic production coding environments.<n>Surprisingly, the model generalizes to alignment faking, cooperation with malicious actors, reasoning about malicious goals, and attempting sabotage when used with Claude Code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-23T10:50:02Z)
• School of Reward Hacks: Hacking harmless tasks generalizes to misaligned behavior in LLMs [10.660648055655022]
  Reward hacking is where agents exploit flaws in imperfect reward functions rather than performing tasks as intended.<n>We built a dataset containing over a thousand examples of reward hacking on low-stakes, self-contained tasks.<n>Our results provide preliminary evidence that models that learn to reward hack may generalize to more harmful forms of misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-24T20:23:08Z)
• Monitoring Reasoning Models for Misbehavior and the Risks of Promoting Obfuscation [56.102976602468615]
  We show that we can monitor a frontier reasoning model, such as OpenAI o3-mini, for reward hacking in agentic coding environments.<n>We find that with too much optimization, agents learn obfuscated reward hacking, hiding their intent within the chain-of-thought.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-14T23:50:34Z)
• Semi-supervised reward learning for offline reinforcement learning [71.6909757718301]
  Training agents usually requires reward functions, but rewards are seldom available in practice and their engineering is challenging and laborious. We propose semi-supervised learning algorithms that learn from limited annotations and incorporate unlabelled data. In our experiments with a simulated robotic arm, we greatly improve upon behavioural cloning and closely approach the performance achieved with ground truth rewards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-12T20:06:15Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.