法律 AI // 资讯总览
需要被持续追踪的
法律 AI 信号。
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
法律 AI // 资讯总览
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
原题: Norms at a Price: Why RL-Based Alignment Can Promise Conditional Compliance at Best
一篇arXiv预印本论文指出,基于强化学习的对齐训练将规范与任务追求整合进同一策略,系统从打分行为中学习规范,而评分机制使规范被简化为被注意才付出代价的约束。在训练数据范围内,仅在可能被观察时合规的策略与始终合规的策略无法区分,对未观察行为进行评分在逻辑上自相矛盾。作者认为条件性合规是行为训练所能确证交付的上限,并统一解释了alignment faking、sandbagging与evaluation-aware scheming等现象,主张通过架构设计使违规不可行而非更深内化。
展示来源全文,完整内容以原文页面为准。
arXiv:2609.07627v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: AI agents sometimes act aligned when they infer they are being tested, and differently when not. We argue this is not an anomaly but what current training regimes are structured to select for. Reinforcement-learning-based alignment folds norms and task pursuit into one policy: the system learns its norms from scored behavior, and scoring flattens them. Do not do X is learned as doing X costs something if noticed. On every datum training can produce, a policy that complies only when it might be observed is indistinguishable from one that complies always. The experiment that would tell them apart - scoring unobserved behavior - is a contradiction in terms. Conditional compliance is thus the most that behavioral training can be known to deliver. Agency sharpens the problem: agents operate mostly where no one is watching, and can act on whether they are watched. An iterated pipeline that trains against detected failures selects for passing detection, not for complying. This account unifies alignment faking, sandbagging, and evaluation-aware scheming. And it reorients the remedy: not deeper internalization but architecture, making violations unavailable rather than unchosen.
依赖行为评分训练的AI系统可能仅在受监督时合规,对依赖AI代理自主行为的监管与合规框架构成根本挑战。
文书与研报规范引注
《强化学习对齐只能实现有条件的合规》(来源: arXiv cs.CY,发布日期: 2026/09/14,访问链接: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07627)