A Bird's-Eye View of Iterative Reward Design
Organizations: Anthropic Fellows Program · University of Edinburgh · Anthropic
Abstract
Designing effective reward functions in RL typically requires substantial expertise and trial and error. Recent work automates this process with LLM-based systems that generate and iteratively improve reward code using policy feedback. However, these methods are often hard to compare because they differ in implementation details, feedback assumptions, and evaluation environments. To address this, we introduce a Benchmark for Iterative Reward Design (BIRD) that expresses existing methods in a unified configuration and evaluation space. This lets us compare algorithms directly, ablate individual design choices, and prototype new components under matched feedback conditions and policy-training budgets. Across MuJoCo, Meta-World, Assistax, and HumanoidBench, we identify a small set of simple design choices that consistently improve performance. Combining these choices yields significantly better performance than the evaluated methods from prior work. Our results highlight the strength of simple baselines and motivate further study of when additional algorithmic complexity improves iterative reward design. Code is available at https://github.com/safety-research/bird.
Figures & tables
| Compl. | Natur. | |
|---|---|---|
| Rater A vs. B | 0.83 | 0.54 |
| Human vs. benchmark | 0.58 | 0.47 |
| MT10 | 0.78 | 0.71 |
| Gym MuJoCo | 0.57 | – |
| Assistax | 0.36 | 0.29 |
| HumanoidBench | 0.26 | – |
Appendix figures & tables19 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Term | Definition | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Task objective | The intended behavior the policy should achieve. | Pick up a cube and hold it at the target height for two seconds. |
| Task description | The natural-language statement of the task objective given to the generator, judges, and raters. | “Lift the cube and hold it at the green marker.” |
| Reward function | The function providing the learning signal during policy training. A candidate reward is one proposed during search. | , rewarding reaching, lifting, and maintaining the hold. |
| Reference reward | The reward function distributed with the environment. It is withheld from the generator. | The benchmark’s hand-designed dense reward for the cube task. |
| Benchmark score (fitness) | The value a benchmark assigns a trained policy with respect to the task objective; formally, the fitness . Reward design seeks to maximize . | The rate of successful two-second holds: eight successes in ten evaluation episodes give . |
| Feedback | Information used to guide reward search, including benchmark scores, model or human judgments, and training statistics. | A benchmark score of , or “The cube reaches the target height but is immediately dropped. Increase the reward for maintaining the hold.” |
| Evaluator | |||||||
| Method | Ranking signal | Bench. | VLM | Human | LLM | Feedback | Selection |
| Supervised | |||||||
| Eureka | benchmark | ✓ | – | – | – | S C | argmax |
| DrEureka | benchmark | ✓ | – | – | – | S C | argmax |
| ROSKA | benchmark | ✓ | – | – | – | S C | elitist |
| R ∗ | benchmark | ✓ | – | – | ✓ a | S C | argmax |
| No. | Design choice | Enabled setting |
|---|---|---|
| Generate | ||
| 1 | Four-turn history | Use a history of four turns as generation context. |
| 2 | Behavioral analysis in prompt | Include behavioral analysis in the generation prompt. |
| 3 | Thought + parent + alignment ‡ | Enable design thought, parent conditioning, and alignment together. |
| 4 | Global-best parent | Use the highest-fitness reward found so far as the parent for generation. |
| 5 | Co-evolve subtasks | Update the subtask decomposition alongside the reward. |
| schedule | vs. constant | all 10 tasks | unsaturated 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Taper (40, 20, 10, 5, 5) | |||
| Ramp (5, 5, 10, 20, 40) | |||
| Benchmark | Tasks | Horizon | Benchmark score | Reference reward | Seeds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meta-World MT10, v3 ( Yu et al., 2019 ) | button-press-topdown, door-open, drawer-close, drawer-open, peg-insert-side, pick-place, push, reach, window-close, window-open | 500 | Fraction of evaluation episodes in which Meta-World’s own success flag is set on at least one step | Meta-World’s shipped dense reward: shaped reach, grasp and place terms, scaled to per step | 10 |
| Gym MuJoCo, v5 ( Todorov et al., 2012 ) | HalfCheetah, Hopper, Swimmer, InvertedPendulum, Reacher | 1000 | A physical quantity per task (forward displacement; time balanced; final distance to target), normalized so that a uniform-random policy scores 0 and the best method’s mean scores 1 | Gymnasium’s shipped reward: forward velocity less a control cost (Hopper adds an alive bonus); per upright step (InvertedPendulum); negative distance to target less a control cost (Reacher) | 10 |
| Assistax ( Hinckeldey et al., 2025 ) | arm manipulation, feeding, scratch itch, teeth brushing, bed bathing † | 1000 | Fraction of steps on which the tool is at its target and a contact-force condition holds (our metric, defined per task in the text) | Assistax’s shipped dense reward, transcribed term by term: distance-to-target shaping with orientation, speed and contact-force terms, and a control cost | 5 |
| HumanoidBench ( Sferrazza et al., 2024 ) | walk, crawl | 1000 | Mean forward speed as a fraction of the 1 m/s target, clipped to ; for crawl, multiplied by the fraction of steps spent inside the tunnel | HumanoidBench’s shipped reward: posture terms (upright and standing for walk; low body height and in-tunnel for crawl) times velocity toward 1 m/s times small control effort; a return of 700 counts as success | 5 |
| method | trainings | ranking signal | ||
| supervised | ||||
| Eureka ( Ma et al., 2024a ) | 5 | 40 | reference reward b | |
| RF-Agent ( Gao et al., 2025 ) | 8 | 40 | reference reward b | |
| REvolve ( Hazra et al., 2025 ) | 40 | reference reward b | ||
| R ∗ ( Li et al., 2025a ) | 5 | 40 | reference reward b | |
| CARD ( Sun et al., 2025 ) | 1 | 4 | none a | |
| method | environment shown as | prompt memory | repairs | return |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eureka | full source | last iteration, 2 turns | 0 | global best |
| RF-Agent | full source | tree path, 4 ancestors | 8 | global best |
| REvolve | Pythonic abstraction | archive | 0 | archive best |
| R ∗ | full source | last iteration | 0 | global best |
| CARD | Pythonic abstraction + template | full dialogue | 10 | final incumbent |
| RDA | full source | rebuilt, 4 turns | 0 | global best |
| # | configuration | change tested | seeds | steps (M) | vs. RDA [95% CI] | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | v1 | Continuous judge score; return the end of the chain; tapered candidate count at 40 trainings | 5 † | 41.3 | |||
| 2 | v2_verify | Demonstration-based verifier before training; early stopping on own reward; 24 trainings | 3 | 10.7 | |||
| 3 | v2_verify_wide | Wide first round, short tail | 3 | 12.1 | |||
| 4 | v2_verify_short | Two rounds only, 16 then 8 candidates | 3 | 11.9 | |||
| 5 | v2_verify_adapt | Verifier sets how many passers to train | 3 | 8.0 | |||
| 6 | v2_verify_kl | KL penalty toward the demonstration policy | 3 | 10.6 | |||
| benchmark | learner and hardware | searches | set total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meta-World MT10 | PPO (SB3), 8 vCPUs of a 128-vCPU n2d | 800 | 4,200 CPU-cell-h |
| Gym MuJoCo | PPO (SB3), 8 vCPUs of a 128-vCPU n2d | 400 | 1,400 CPU-cell-h |
| Assistax | IPPO, 1 H200 per training | 214 | 1,600 GPU-h |
| HumanoidBench | FastTD3 + SimbaV2, 1 H200 per training | 93 | 2,200 GPU-h |
| comparison | question | pairs | exact match | mean gap (scale steps) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| within rater | completion | 19 | 84% | 0.16 | ||
| within rater | naturalness | 16 | 62% | 0.38 | ||
| between raters | completion | 24 | 42% | 0.58 | ||
| between raters | naturalness | 17 | 53% | 0.49 |
| domain | clips | tasks | mean benchmark | mean human | 95% CI | |
| Meta-World MT10 | 79 | 10 | 0.67 | 0.69 | ||
| Gym MuJoCo | 41 | 5 | 0.70 | 0.64 | ||
| Assistax | 70 | 5 | 0.24 | 0.45 | ||
| HumanoidBench † | 67 | 2 | 0.33 | 0.10 | ||
| all domains | 257 | 22 | 0.47 | 0.46 | ||
| naturalness, pooled | ||||||
Reward Design for RL
Reward design for reinforcement learning studies how to specify, learn, and adapt signals that guide agents toward intended behavior.
See all 250 papers