Reinforcement learning fine-tuning of large language models increasingly adopts multiple reward dimensions, including verifiable rules, task-specific evaluators, and learned reward models, to provide richer supervision across diverse capabilities. These dimensions are commonly scalarized with fixed aggregation weights. We identify a failure mode in which aggregation itself induces reward hacking: static projection aliases qualitatively different reward profiles into a single scalar, steering optimization toward whichever dimensions are easiest, densest, or systematically favored by the reward signal. Over training, this traps the policy in suboptimal profiles and prevents convergence to better-balanced ones that would yield higher task performance. To address this, we propose **Adaptive Multi-Reward Projection (AMRP)**, a lightweight online method that reallocates aggregation weights using three signals—relative shortfall, reward volatility, and recent progress—increasing pressure on lagging, unstable, or stagnant dimensions while relieving saturated ones. Across structured reasoning, citation-grounded generation, and open-ended alignment under GRPO, AMRP consistently improves reward-profile balance and downstream performance over fixed and dynamic weighting baselines; it also remains effective with GDPO and PPO, supporting compatibility across RL algorithms. Our code is available at https://github.com/yyhappier/AMRP.git.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in various natural language processing tasks. However, LLMs may rely on dataset biases as shortcuts for prediction, which can significantly impair their robustness and generalization capabilities. This paper presents Shortcut Suite, a comprehensive test suite designed to evaluate the impact of shortcuts on LLMs’ performance, incorporating six shortcut types, five evaluation metrics, and four prompting strategies. Our extensive experiments yield several key findings: 1) LLMs demonstrate varying reliance on shortcuts for downstream tasks, which significantly impairs their performance. 2) Larger LLMs are more likely to utilize shortcuts under zero-shot and few-shot in-context learning prompts. 3) Chain-of-thought prompting notably reduces shortcut reliance and outperforms other prompting strategies, while few-shot prompts generally underperform compared to zero-shot prompts. 4) LLMs often exhibit overconfidence in their predictions, especially when dealing with datasets that contain shortcuts. 5) LLMs generally have a lower explanation quality in shortcut-laden datasets, with errors falling into three types: distraction, disguised comprehension, and logical fallacy. Our findings offer new insights for evaluating robustness and generalization in LLMs and suggest potential directions for mitigating the reliance on shortcuts.