A closer look at whether safe reasoning training can avoid RL pathologies
xuanalogue · x · 2026-07-22
The author follows up on the earlier reasoning-training discussion with a more detailed take on why the problem may be fixable.
- The post says the earlier comment is appreciated for adding details, especially around long-horizon instruction following and user-constraint weaknesses.
- At the same time, it argues that the reply still does not say much about RL training incentives.
- Overall, it continues the debate about whether safe reasoning can be trained with alternative SFT-style pipelines.
This is still a hypothesis-driven research discussion rather than a concrete result.
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