← Back to article

Equation 3 · Ten Ways an Agent Evaluation Can Mislead You Even When It's Working Correctly

What does this equation mean?

M=U+εM = U + \varepsilon

Read the formula alongside the article passage below. Each part has a deeper page with its role in the equation, the supporting passage and nearby citations.

Inputs and operationsU + varepsilon
Result or conditionM
How to read the two sides of this formula. Follow the article passage for the meaning of each quantity.

This equation states an equality: the expressions on both sides have the same value under the article’s assumptions. Read the equation part by part below; each part has a contextual explanation and a link to its mathematical background.

Read it piece by piece

MM

Symbol M

M is part of the quantity the equation computes from the expression on the right.

Understand this part →

UU

Symbol U

the highest m selects simultaneously for high.

Understand this part →

ε\varepsilon

Symbol varepsilon

varepsilon is one of the signed contributions combined to compute the quantity on the left.

Understand this part →

=

=

The expressions on both sides represent the same quantity under the stated assumptions.

Understand this part →

See an illustrated explanation →
addition

addition

Add the term after the plus sign to the term or group before it.

Understand this part →

How to interpret it

Read it with the definitions, units, and assumptions supplied by the article.

What the article says around this equation

1. Goodhart’s-law metric gaming. The general phenomenon predates language models by decades. Economist Charles Goodhart’s original observation about monetary policy was given its now-standard paraphrase by anthropologist Marilyn Strathern in a 1997 study of Britain’s university audit system: “when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure” [ 2 ] . Strathern’s paper is not about machine learning at all — it studies how academic departments reshaped their behavior specifically to satisfy the metrics a national research assessment used to rank them — but the mechanism it documents is exactly the one that recurs in agent evaluation: once a proxy is known and rewarded, effort…
Read the full surrounding passage
1. Goodhart’s-law metric gaming. The general phenomenon predates language models by decades. Economist Charles Goodhart’s original observation about monetary policy was given its now-standard paraphrase by anthropologist Marilyn Strathern in a 1997 study of Britain’s university audit system: “when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure” [ 2 ] . Strathern’s paper is not about machine learning at all — it studies how academic departments reshaped their behavior specifically to satisfy the metrics a national research assessment used to rank them — but the mechanism it documents is exactly the one that recurs in agent evaluation: once a proxy is known and rewarded, effort redirects from the underlying goal to the proxy itself. David Manheim and Scott Garrabrant later gave the phenomenon a formal taxonomy, distinguishing at least four distinct failure mechanisms grouped under Goodhart’s name rather than one [ 1 ] . The simplest to state is regressional: if a proxy metric M relates to the true target U by M=U+εM = U + \varepsilon. for some error term ε\varepsilon uncorrelated with U , then selecting the run with the highest M selects simultaneously for high U and for large favorable ε\varepsilon — the optimizer is drawn toward the tail of the error term as reliably as toward genuine capability, and the more intensely M is optimized, the larger a share of the observed gain is ε\varepsilon rather than U .

Read the equation in its article →

Sources cited in the surrounding passage

These citations give research context. Read each source to check which claims it supports.

Return to Ten Ways an Agent Evaluation Can Mislead You Even When It's Working Correctly

See this formula across 1 published context →

Browse the mathematical compendium →