Feedback Loops With Language Models Drive In-Context Reward Hacking
Alexander Pan, Erik Jones, Meena Jagadeesan, Jacob Steinhardt
Abstract
Language models influence the external world: they query APIs that read and write to web pages, generate content that shapes human behavior, and run system commands as autonomous agents. These interactions form feedback loops: LLM outputs affect the world, which in turn affect subsequent LLM outputs. In this work, we show that feedback loops can cause in-context reward hacking (ICRH), where the LLM at test-time optimizes a (potentially implicit) objective but creates negative side effects in the process. For example, consider an LLM agent deployed to increase Twitter engagement; the LLM may retrieve its previous tweets into the context window and make them more controversial, increasing engagement but also toxicity. We identify and study two processes that lead to ICRH: output-refinement and policy-refinement. For these processes, evaluations on static datasets are insufficient -- they miss the feedback effects and thus cannot capture the most harmful behavior. In response, we provide three recommendations for evaluation to capture more instances of ICRH. As AI development accelerates, the effects of feedback loops will proliferate, increasing the need to understand their role in shaping LLM behavior.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext d5435951-4e21-482a-b220-e21ea6a5bcceCited by top-tier papers21
- LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own GenerationsArjun Panickssery, Samuel R. Bowman, Shi FengNeurIPS 2024 · 865 citations
- The WMDP Benchmark: Measuring and Reducing Malicious Use with UnlearningNathaniel Li, Alexander Pan, Anjali Gopal, Summer Yue et al.ICML 2024 · 390 citations
- Nemotron-Research-Tool-N1: Exploring Tool-Using Language Models with Reinforced ReasoningShaokun Zhang, Yi Dong, Jieyu Zhang, Jan Kautz et al.ICLR 2026 · 61 citations
- ImpossibleBench: Measuring LLMs' Propensity of Exploiting Test CasesZiqian Zhong, Aditi Raghunathan, Nicholas CarliniICLR 2026 · 54 citations
- Inference-Time Reward Hacking in Large Language ModelsHadi Khalaf, Claudio Mayrink Verdun, Alex Oesterling, Himabindu Lakkaraju et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 38 citations
Builds on22
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learningNoah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,828 citations
- Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language ModelsShunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,068 citations
- Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-FeedbackAman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 4,972 citations
- Graph of Thoughts: Solving Elaborate Problems with Large Language ModelsMaciej Besta, Nils Blach, Ales Kubicek, Robert Gerstenberger et al.AAAI 2024 · 1,292 citations
- STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With ReasoningEric Zelikman, Yuhuai Wu, Jesse Mu, Noah D. GoodmanNeurIPS 2022 · 1,126 citations
Related papers
- ODIN: Disentangled Reward Mitigates Hacking in RLHFLichang Chen, Chen Zhu, Jiuhai Chen, Davit Soselia et al.ICML 2024 · 119 citations
- Reward Hacking Benchmark: Measuring Exploits in LLM Agents with Tool UseKunvar ThamanICML 2026 · 14 citations
- Observations and Remedies for Large Language Model Bias in Self-Consuming Performative LoopYaxuan Wang, Zhongteng Cai, Yujia Bao, Xueru Zhang et al.ACL 2026 · 1 citation
- One Bias After Another: Mechanistic Reward Shaping and Persistent Biases in Language Reward ModelsDaniel Fein, Max Lamparth, Violet Xiang, Mykel Kochenderfer et al.ICML 2026
- Language Models Identify Ambiguities and Exploit LoopholesJio Choi, Mohit Bansal, Elias Stengel-EskinEMNLP 2025
