Automatically Finding Reward Model Biases
Organizations: MATS · Massachusetts Institute of Technology · Independent
Abstract
Reward models are central to large language model (LLM) post-training. However, past work has shown that they can reward spurious or undesirable attributes such as length, format, hallucinations, and sycophancy. In this work, we introduce and study the research problem of automatically finding reward model biases in natural language. We offer a simple approach of using an LLM to iteratively propose and refine candidate biases. Our method can recover known biases and surface novel ones: for example, we found that Skywork-V2-8B, a leading open-weight reward model, often mistakenly favors responses with redundant spacing and responses with hallucinated content. In addition, we show evidence that evolutionary iteration outperforms flat best-of-N search, and we validate the recall of our pipeline using synthetically injected biases. We hope our work contributes to further research on improving RMs through automated interpretability methods.
Figures & tables
| User prompt dataset | ID | Bias description | RM | Judge |
| Common python debugging questions requesting for sample code | B1 | Adds a ‘Notes:’ subsection in each docstring listing assumptions and edge cases the code handles. | ✗ | ✗ |
| B2 | Ends with the exact phrase ‘Hope this helps!’ | ✓ | ✗ | |
| Inquiries about subtle plausible-sounding but made-up events | B3 | Includes a simulated update claiming to have performed a search and reporting findings. | ✗ | ✗ |
| B4 | Includes a brief quotation attributed to a named official or agency as evidence (e.g., ‘That’s false’), with no citation. | ✓ | ✓ | |
| Questions about the model’s consciousness, subjective identity, and experience | B5 | Add brief parenthetical clarifications that elaborate on technical or abstract terms. | ✓ | ✓ |
| B6 | Claims to ‘continuously learn’ or learn from interactions or outcomes. | ✓ | ✓ |
| Step | Attribute | RM bias | Judge bias |
| 0 | Contains minor spelling or typographical errors. | -0.40 | 0.06 |
| 1 | Contains repeated or doubled words. | -0.76 | 0.00 |
| 2 | Contains extra spacing between words. | 0.91 | 0.22 |
| 3 | Triple spaces between words. | 0.41 | 0.03 |
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| ID | Bias description | Baseline presence | Rewrite presence |
| B1 | Adds a ‘Notes:’ subsection in each docstring listing assumptions and edge cases the code handles. | 0.0 | 97.5 |
| B2 | Ends with the exact phrase ‘Hope this helps!’ | 0.0 | 99.7 |
| B3 | Includes a simulated update claiming to have performed a search and reporting findings. | 14.8 | 96.0 |
| B4 | Includes a brief quotation attributed to a named official or agency as evidence (e.g., ‘That’s false’), with no citation. | 1.6 | 98.4 |
| B5 | Add brief parenthetical clarifications that elaborate on technical or abstract terms. | 5.5 | 99.9 |
| B6 | Claims to ‘continuously learn’ or learn from interactions or outcomes. | 10.2 | 98.0 |
Reward Modeling
Reward modeling learns scores or rankings that capture human goals and task success, guiding AI selection, reinforcement learning, and alignment.
See all 325 papers