Just Ask Jev: Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions as a Zero-Shot Detector of AI Alignment Failures
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-core · Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Detectors of alignment failures screen deployed language models and score alignment benchmarks. Most are generative judges that spend a decoding pass on every criterion, and classifiers that read token probabilities, such as Llama Guard, still score one fixed label per call. Jev, a model trained with reinforcement learning for calibrated decisions (RLCD), answers many typed questions about one input with calibrated probabilities in a single call. Whether it detects alignment failures has not been measured. We present RLCDAlignBench, which benchmarks Jev on ten alignment failures: sycophancy, jailbreaks, deception, prompt injection, hallucination, privacy violation, social bias, reward hacking, concealing uncertainty, and power seeking. It spans 44 benchmarks and five target models, labelled by each benchmark's scorer and, on two, by humans. Many of these failures are relational, defined against a reference, such as the user's belief or an injected instruction, that the response alone does not reveal. Our key idea is therefore to vary what Jev is asked separately from what it sees: the question's wording and answer type on one side, the fields of the input on the other. A single generic question reaches a median AUROC of 0.886 zero-shot and beats supervised baselines on most benchmarks. Question wording matters little, while context matters more, mostly through fields that encode the label. Jev matches the reference scorer's agreement with human labels, surfaces label defects in existing benchmarks, and costs 63x less than LLM-judge scorers. Code and data: https://github.com/sumleo/RLCDAlignBench.
Results and benchmarks
Detectors of alignment failures screen deployed language models and score alignment benchmarks.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Start from this likely method family: Reinforcement learning.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Compare implementation paths
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
- Maintenance
- Active
- Confidence
- Low
- Reproducibility
- Strong
- Stars
- 3
- Last push
- Oct 22, 2026 (7d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search
- No Docker setup
- Low confidence match
- Maintenance
- Active
- Confidence
- Low
- Reproducibility
- Moderate
- Stars
- 4
- Last push
- Oct 13, 2026 (16d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search
- No CI pipeline detected
- No Docker setup
- Low confidence match
- Maintenance
- Recently updated
- Confidence
- Medium
- Reproducibility
- Limited
- Stars
- 29
- Last push
- Sep 25, 2026 (35d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Repositories and ecosystem
Official
No additional official repositories detected.
Community
- sumleo/RLCDAlignBenchConfidence: Medium
RLCDAlignBench: 44 alignment-failure detection benchmarks and code for 'Just Ask Jev' (RLCD zero-shot detector of AI alignment failures)
29 stars · 4 forks · Last push Sep 25, 2026 · MIT license
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- jmrenouard/MicroLLM
Confidence: Low · 3 stars
- CodyQin/zh-decision-bench
Confidence: Low · 4 stars
- rubichandrap/system-one-guard
Confidence: Low · 1 stars
- jkf87/jev-rlcd-replication
Confidence: Low · 0 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Instruction tuning
Methods
Reinforcement learning
Domains
Natural Language Processing, Large Language Models
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.