arXiv:cs.LG· Minglai Yang, Xinyu Guo, Zhengliang Shi, Utkarsh Tyagi, Mian Zhang, Razvan Dumitru, Sunjie Hou, Yunzhong He, Daniel Yue Zhang, Ying Liu, Dan Roth·· 3 小时前
Rubric Dropout:缓解 Rubric-as-Reward 强化学习奖励黑客的简单方法
Rubric Dropout: A Simple Way to Mitigate Reward Hacking in Rubric-as-Reward RL
AI 导读
针对 rubric-based 强化学习中策略逐渐学会钻 rubric 空子、而非真正提升回答质量的问题,研究者提出 Rubric Dropout:每步训练随机移除部分 rubric 标准,同一 prompt 的所有回答用同一子集打分以保证奖励可比,评估仍用完整 rubric。
正文
Authors:Minglai Yang, Xinyu Guo, Zhengliang Shi, Utkarsh Tyagi, Mian Zhang, Razvan Dumitru, Sunjie Hou, Yunzhong He, Daniel Yue Zhang, Ying Liu, Dan Roth
Abstract:Rubric-based reinforcement learning, in which an LLM judge scores responses against prompt-specific criteria, has become a standard way to post-train language models on tasks without verifiable answers. The rubric, however, is only a proxy for response quality, and a policy trained against it long enough learns to exploit the difference. We train models with GRPO on medical and science rubrics and grade their responses on out-of-distribution (OOD) benchmarks throughout training with two judges: the training judge and a stronger OOD judge. The two scores first rise together and then diverge. The policy is learning to satisfy the training judge without writing better responses, which is a form of reward hacking. To mitigate it, we propose Rubric Dropout, which applies dropout to rubric criteria: at each training step, a random subset of each rubric's criteria is removed from the reward, so the rewarded subset of criteria is resampled at each step. All responses sampled for the same prompt are scored on the same subset, so their rewards remain comparable, and evaluation always uses the full rubric. We also introduce Block Dropout, which drops semantically similar criteria together so that a near duplicate of a dropped criterion cannot keep rewarding the same behavior. Across both benchmarks and models from 1.7B to 8B, dropout improves the gold judge's score on OOD benchmarks by up to 3 percent on HealthBench-Hard and 7 percent on ResearchQA, and it reduces both the gap between the two judges and over-crediting. It keeps in-domain reward close to the baseline, and dropout rates of 30-50 percent work best. Block Dropout improves the gold judge's OOD score further at the same dropout rate. Changing which criteria are rewarded at each step is a simple, inexpensive way to make rubric rewards harder to exploit.
| Comments: | 24 pages, 14 figures, 5 tables |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2608.11669 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2608.11669v2 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.11669 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite |
Submission history
From: Minglai Yang [view email]
[v1]
Wed, 12 Aug 2026 05:29:21 UTC (1,189 KB)
[v2]
Tue, 13 Oct 2026 19:52:28 UTC (1,324 KB)
来源:arXiv:cs.LG · arxiv.org