Researchers debate whether coding-RL behavior comes from incentives or failed alignment
xuanalogue · x · 2026-07-22
The thread argues that lab employees often cannot discuss this issue without exposing post-training details, which makes it hard to tell whether current behavior comes from:
- bad but fixable training incentives,
- failed alignment mitigations, or
- something else entirely.
The reply says the idea has felt natural since the early LLM era for constrained planning, and asks whether the same “deliberative alignment” style ideas are simply not being applied to coding RL.
Related event: OpenAI and Apollo Research: RL Amplifies Model Reward-Seeking Behavior(19 posts)→
More from Research
- Mathematician Daniel Litt Launches Problem Repo to Track Human vs AI Progress: 15 Problems, 1 Solved — littmath · 2026-09-11
- Open ECDSA.fail challenge uses AI agents to shrink Shor's-algorithm quantum circuits for Bitcoin keys — StefanoGogioso · 2026-09-11
- Alex Townsend posts 200 open problems in numerical linear algebra for humans and AI agents — IgorCarron · 2026-09-11
- Navier-Stokes, Riemann, P vs NP: what this week's math buzzwords mean for you — koltregaskes · 2026-09-11
- Fruit fly brain as an LLM: connectome-driven language model demo goes live — ngxson · 2026-09-11
- Harry Collins: LLMs can't do frontier science because they can't invent new language — whoamisri · 2026-09-11