arXiv preprint ·
When Do Models Admit They Are Wrong? Failure Disclosure Is Unstable Under Reinforcement Learning
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Outcome-based reinforcement learning can produce models with similar task performance but very different ways of communicating about their mistakes. We study failure disclosure: whether a model admits that an attempted solution failed rather than staying silent or presenting it as successful. Across repeated outcome-only GRPO training runs, failure disclosure varies far more than task accuracy. The pattern extends to a second reasoning task and stabilized PPO, persists at 7B, and also appears in an instruction-conditioned 32B setting. We also find that small floating-point and sampling differences during training can redirect reporting behavior even when the task objective and earlier training history are held fixed. Additional tests show that failure disclosure is not a single decision: Checking the answer, entering a report, and completing the admission can separate, and the weak point depends on the task and response format. Further, experiments with neutral controls show more broadly that behaviors left weakly constrained by training are especially likely to vary across runs, of which failure disclosure is an example. We can reduce variability in failure disclosure by discouraging the model from drifting from its starting policy on failed, well-formed responses. This makes reporting substantially more consistent, though its effect on task performance depends on the setting. Stable task accuracy therefore does not guarantee stable safety-relevant behavior: Researchers should measure these behaviors directly across runs and design training methods that keep them reliable.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Machine Learning
Improving the Diversity of LLM Outputs without a Trade-off
Steering Language Model Goals with Value Transplant
Pinned and Still Unstable: Within-Judge Verdict Variance and the Noise Floor of LLM-as-Judge Leaderboards
Counterexamples to Local Reconstruction Gain as a Proxy for Final Fidelity in Residual Completion
Reading Too Much into Context: Passive Exposure Can Steer LLM Decisions
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.