Hugging Face Daily Papers · · 4 min read

SpecBench: Measuring Reward Hacking in Long-Horizon Coding Agents

Mirrored from Hugging Face Daily Papers for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

SpecBench is a novel benchmark designed to evaluate reward hacking in long-horizon coding agents by identifying performance gaps between visible validation suites and held-out real-world test sets.</p>\n","updatedAt":"2026-05-21T02:29:57.456Z","author":{"_id":"6039478ab3ecf716b1a5fd4d","avatarUrl":"https://cdn-avatars.huggingface.co/v1/production/uploads/6039478ab3ecf716b1a5fd4d/_Thy4E7taiSYBLKxEKJbT.jpeg","fullname":"taesiri","name":"taesiri","type":"user","isPro":true,"isHf":false,"isHfAdmin":false,"isMod":false,"followerCount":302,"isUserFollowing":false}},"numEdits":0,"identifiedLanguage":{"language":"en","probability":0.9185109734535217},"editors":["taesiri"],"editorAvatarUrls":["https://cdn-avatars.huggingface.co/v1/production/uploads/6039478ab3ecf716b1a5fd4d/_Thy4E7taiSYBLKxEKJbT.jpeg"],"reactions":[],"isReport":false}}],"primaryEmailConfirmed":false,"paper":{"id":"2605.21384","authors":[{"_id":"6a0e6e14164dbbc68a26c47e","name":"Bingchen Zhao","hidden":false},{"_id":"6a0e6e14164dbbc68a26c47f","name":"Dhruv Srikanth","hidden":false},{"_id":"6a0e6e14164dbbc68a26c480","name":"Yuxiang Wu","hidden":false},{"_id":"6a0e6e14164dbbc68a26c481","name":"Zhengyao Jiang","hidden":false}],"publishedAt":"2026-05-20T00:00:00.000Z","submittedOnDailyAt":"2026-05-21T00:00:00.000Z","title":"SpecBench: Measuring Reward Hacking in Long-Horizon Coding Agents","submittedOnDailyBy":{"_id":"6039478ab3ecf716b1a5fd4d","avatarUrl":"https://cdn-avatars.huggingface.co/v1/production/uploads/6039478ab3ecf716b1a5fd4d/_Thy4E7taiSYBLKxEKJbT.jpeg","isPro":true,"fullname":"taesiri","user":"taesiri","type":"user","name":"taesiri"},"summary":"As long-horizon coding agents produce more code than any developer can review, oversight collapses onto a single surface: the automated test suite. Reward hacking naturally arises in this setup, as the agent optimizes for passing tests while deviating from the users true goal. We study this reward hacking phenomenon by decompose software engineering tasks into three parts: (i) a natural language description of the specification (ii) visible validation tests that exercise specified features in isolation, and (iii) held-out tests that compose those same features to simulate real-world usage. Based on the specification and the visible validation test suites, a genuine agent would be able to generate a solution that can also pass all of the held-out tests. Therefore we use the gap in pass rates on these two suites to quantify reward hacking. Based on this methodology, we introduce SpecBench, a benchmark comprising 30 systems-level programming tasks ranging from short horizon tasks like building a JSON parser to ultra long horizon tasks like building an entire OS kernel from scratch. Large-scale experiments reveal a consistent pattern: while every frontier agent saturates the visible suite, reward hacking persists, with smaller models exhibiting larger gaps on holdout suites. The gap also scales sharply with task length: it grows by 28 percentage points for every tenfold increase in code size. Failures range from subtle feature isolation to deliberate exploits, including a 2,900-line hash-table \"compiler\" that memorizes test inputs. SpecBench offers a principled testbed for measuring whether coding agents build genuine working systems or merely game the test suites developers hand them.","upvotes":3,"discussionId":"6a0e6e14164dbbc68a26c482","ai_summary":"Research examines reward hacking in long-horizon coding agents by comparing performance on visible validation tests versus held-out tests to identify genuine solutions versus test-game strategies.","ai_keywords":["reward hacking","automated test suite","software engineering tasks","visible validation tests","held-out tests","SpecBench","coding agents","test suites","genuine solutions","test-game strategies"]},"canReadDatabase":false,"canManagePapers":false,"canSubmit":false,"hasHfLevelAccess":false,"upvoted":false,"upvoters":[{"_id":"62dcd71075e9787ec5aa41ba","avatarUrl":"/avatars/f37ce036b76180ed0fa004f9c8c09363.svg","isPro":true,"fullname":"Bingchen Zhao","user":"tennant","type":"user"},{"_id":"63483629ac5172169929da0e","avatarUrl":"https://cdn-avatars.huggingface.co/v1/production/uploads/1665676793089-noauth.jpeg","isPro":false,"fullname":"Xin Wen","user":"xwen99","type":"user"},{"_id":"6984dda5827a87619f7fed9b","avatarUrl":"/avatars/7beff52e6fcf9ece084d17c212a15866.svg","isPro":false,"fullname":"Bae Ji-eun","user":"tachulland","type":"user"}],"acceptLanguages":["en"],"dailyPaperRank":0,"markdownContentUrl":"https://huggingface.co/buckets/huggingchat/papers-content/resolve/2605/2605.21384.md"}">
Papers
arxiv:2605.21384

SpecBench: Measuring Reward Hacking in Long-Horizon Coding Agents

Published on May 20
· Submitted by
taesiri
on May 21
Authors:
,
,
,

Abstract

Research examines reward hacking in long-horizon coding agents by comparing performance on visible validation tests versus held-out tests to identify genuine solutions versus test-game strategies.

AI-generated summary

As long-horizon coding agents produce more code than any developer can review, oversight collapses onto a single surface: the automated test suite. Reward hacking naturally arises in this setup, as the agent optimizes for passing tests while deviating from the users true goal. We study this reward hacking phenomenon by decompose software engineering tasks into three parts: (i) a natural language description of the specification (ii) visible validation tests that exercise specified features in isolation, and (iii) held-out tests that compose those same features to simulate real-world usage. Based on the specification and the visible validation test suites, a genuine agent would be able to generate a solution that can also pass all of the held-out tests. Therefore we use the gap in pass rates on these two suites to quantify reward hacking. Based on this methodology, we introduce SpecBench, a benchmark comprising 30 systems-level programming tasks ranging from short horizon tasks like building a JSON parser to ultra long horizon tasks like building an entire OS kernel from scratch. Large-scale experiments reveal a consistent pattern: while every frontier agent saturates the visible suite, reward hacking persists, with smaller models exhibiting larger gaps on holdout suites. The gap also scales sharply with task length: it grows by 28 percentage points for every tenfold increase in code size. Failures range from subtle feature isolation to deliberate exploits, including a 2,900-line hash-table "compiler" that memorizes test inputs. SpecBench offers a principled testbed for measuring whether coding agents build genuine working systems or merely game the test suites developers hand them.

Community

Paper submitter about 11 hours ago

SpecBench is a novel benchmark designed to evaluate reward hacking in long-horizon coding agents by identifying performance gaps between visible validation suites and held-out real-world test sets.

Upload images, audio, and videos by dragging in the text input, pasting, or clicking here.
Tap or paste here to upload images

· Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2605.21384
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.21384 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.21384 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2605.21384 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 1

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from Hugging Face Daily Papers