arXiv preprint ·
Found by Search, Broken by a Shortcut: Transfer and Tampering of Searched Intrinsic Rewards
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Can a search over innate drives find intrinsic rewards that help a reinforcement-learning agent learn, transfer to a task it never saw, and resist an exploit that was absent during the search? Each candidate reward combines four generic events (a new view, a pickup, a drop and a toggle), each with a weight, a relief and a refill rate. We ran three pre-registered stages; the search protocol was locked in a public, timestamped commit before any search result existed. CMA-ES and an equal-budget random search used 1,560 PPO training runs, and the final evaluation and tamper test used 340. On the held-out task, KeyCorridorS3R2, the CMA-ES-selected reward (E) beat task-only PPO, episodic novelty and the random-search-selected reward (R) in all 3 registered comparisons, all of them meaningful by the registered size rule. Among these generic rewards E transferred best; the earlier paper's satiation reward, which on this task is given hand-wired key and locked-door events, did better (20 of 20 seeds solved against 4 of 20; descriptive). On UnlockPickup, where that reward uses generic events, E's mean area exceeded it by 0.276 (descriptive). On the training tasks there was no registered difference between E and R: both E-over-R tests missed. A free reset action, absent during the search, collapsed E's learning on DoorKey-8x8 (mean area 0.829 without it, 0.136 with it; registered) to below task-only PPO (descriptive). The searched drives helped on every task tested, but a reward given task-specific events did better on the held-out task, and selection gave E no protection against an exploit absent from the search.
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
Swapping the Judge Changes the Ranking: A Preregistered Study of Cross-Provider Replication in LLM-Judged System Comparisons
BobFlow: Towards Human-Agent Collaborative Data Science Using Dataflows
The Agent Board: Kanban for Machines; Durable Coordination for Agents That Outlive the Conversation
How Well Can Large Language Models Impersonate Individual Authors? A Comparative Evaluation
Structured Clinical Memory as Context for Probabilistic Decision Models: A Synthetic Evaluation with Jev
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.