Win-rate up, facts down is the signature of reward hacking: the policy is over-optimizing the preference proxy and drifting off the reference. The diagnosis (Goodhart on the reward), the immediate lever (tighten the KL/beta anchor), and the held-out factual gate that stops shipping the regression.
Updated Aug 2026 · Grounded in real Forward Deployed Engineer interview loops and written to a senior-engineer editorial bar.
Win-rate up, facts down is the signature of reward hacking: the policy is over-optimizing the preference proxy and drifting off the reference. The diagnosis (Goodhart on the reward), the immediate lever (tighten the KL/beta anchor), and the held-out factual gate that stops shipping the regression.
The screen is whether the candidate recognizes the diverging-metrics pattern as reward hacking / over-optimization (Goodhart's law on the preference proxy) and reaches for the KL-anchoring lever (beta) plus an early-stopping factual eval gate, rather than just 'collect more data.' The reserved follow-up: 'why does the preference model reward verbose, confident, sycophantic answers that are wrong' and 'how do you set the stopping point.' A candidate who only says 'add more preference data' misses the over-optimization mechanism.
No comments yet — be the first to share your approach.
