When Does Reward Teach State? A Hidden-Automaton Instrument and a Group-Language Warning Signal

Abstract

Does a reinforcement-learning agent that earns reward learn its task's hidden state? We study this question with hidden finite automata that the agent partially controls. Because each automaton is known, we can normalize reward by the best achievable return and probe the network for the true state at every step. Together the two measurements separate failures that reward alone conflates. An agent can encode too little of a state its network could hold, or encode the state and still control poorly. Weak on-policy RL matches random play while the state probe stays at chance. State learning depends on the optimizer, the training budget, and the task's structure. Permutation automata provide a warning before training: no input symbol maps two distinct states to the same successor. On a stratified held-out set, 86 of 103 permutation automata fail the state probe, and the classification is stable across probe read-outs and recovery thresholds. Most of these failures come with weak reward. High reward without the state occurs but is rare. Non-permutation automata can also fail. Oracle-normalized reward alone therefore does not establish that the task's state was learned.