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
- LightMTP: lightweight latent multi-token prediction boosts LLM planning in pretraining — gdm3000 · 2026-10-27
- EMNLP study: AI literary translation reads fine but varies more, even within one book — tuvllms · 2026-10-27
- Lab monkeys at $30-80K each: a 4-year breeding cycle is the real preclinical drug bottleneck — zebird0 · 2026-10-27
- OpenAI Foundation funds UNC tumor antigen project, hiring senior experimental scientist — iskander · 2026-10-27
- Steering attention heads toward honesty: up moral patienthood, down psychopathy — edelwax · 2026-10-27
- Are transcoders overkill? New paper argues plain neurons suffice for circuit analysis — burny_tech · 2026-10-27