Shutdownable Agents through POST-Agency

Misaligned artificial agents might resist shutdown. One proposed solution is to train agents to lack preferences between different-length trajectories. The Discounted Reward for Same-Length Trajectories (DReST) reward function does this by penalizing agents for repeatedly choosing same-length trajectories, and thus incentivizes agents to (1) choose stochastically between different trajectory-lengths (be NEUTRAL about trajectory-lengths), and (2) pursue goals effectively conditional on each trajectory-length (be USEFUL). In this paper, we use DReST to train deep RL agents and fine-tune Qwen3-8B and Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct to be NEUTRAL and USEFUL. We find that these DReST models generalize to being NEUTRAL and USEFUL in unseen contexts at test time. Indeed, DReST RL agents achieve 11% (PPO) and 18% (A2C) higher USEFULNESS on our test set than default agents, and DReST LLMs achieve near-maximum USEFULNESS and NEUTRALITY. We also test our LLMs in an out-of-distribution setting where they can pay costs to influence when shutdown occurs. We find that DReST training roughly halves the mean probability of influencing shutdown (from 0.62 to 0.30 for Qwen and from 0.42 to 0.23 for Llama). DReST training also almost entirely eliminates the share of prompts on which influencing shutdown is the most likely option (from 0.59 to 0.01 for Qwen and from 0.53 to 0.00 for Llama). Our results thus provide some early evidence that DReST could be used to train more advanced agents to be useful and shutdownable.

A long-lived LLM agent, such as OpenClaw, earns its value by acting on a user's preferences and constraints across sessions, not just the current request. Yet today's agents keep what a user volunteers but rarely ask for what stays unspoken, leaving a proactivity gap in long-lived LLM agents: an agent cannot act on a preference it never obtained. As users delegate more of their affairs to agents, the impact of this gap grows. We isolate one concrete, controllable slice of this gap as Ask-to-Remember (ATR): the agent decides whether to ask now for a reusable user preference that the current task does not need but a later session with the same user will. ATR is hard even to evaluate: the right question is underdetermined and its payoff deferred to tasks that may never arise. ATRBench, to the best of our knowledge the first ATR benchmark, makes it measurable by fixing each user's preferences as hidden ground truth, so success demands asking, not recall. Across eight frontier LLM agents, defaults fall at least 62 points below an oracle handed the relevant preference, and prompting closes little of it. Diagnostics identify acquisition as the bottleneck. ATRBench surfaces this proactivity gap in current agents and offers a diagnostic testbed for closing it.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has received increasing attention and adoption in real-world use cases. Most of these systems follow a train-then-fix paradigm, where trained agents do not learn while interacting with the world until performance degrades and retraining becomes necessary. In this position paper, we argue that deploying an agent that is incapable of optimality, but receives an evaluative reward signal, is inherently a continual RL problem. We identify four sources of non-stationarity after deployment that necessitate never-ending learning, and highlight why the best deployed agents never stop adapting. We analyze successful examples of continual RL in the real world, and present the community with the advantages and measures to move away from the current train-then-fix paradigm.