FigureAsia 35 Under 35 · AI
Jakub Pachocki
Age 34 · Scientific leader · Poland and United States; model systems used and examined worldwide
Shaping the Scientific Discipline Behind Frontier Models
- Age at the edition eligibility date
- 34
- Field
- Frontier-model optimisation, training leadership and monitoring
- Country or region
- Poland and United States; model systems used and examined worldwide
- FigureAsia U35 Assessment
- 94.7 / 100
Profile
Career and documented record
As chief scientist, Jakub Pachocki sits at the junction of model design, optimisation and evaluation. His record—from directing GPT-4 and OpenAI Five to studying hidden reward hacking—shows how frontier systems are built, tested and revised through large, coordinated research programmes.
Jakub Pachocki is OpenAI’s chief scientist and one of the central technical organisers behind its model research. Born in Gdańsk and trained in computer science at the University of Warsaw and Carnegie Mellon, he joined the laboratory in 2017. The GPT-4 contribution record names him overall lead and optimisation lead, while the OpenAI Five paper credits him and Szymon Sidor with setting research direction throughout the project. His current work is necessarily collective. In 2025, Pachocki co-authored a study on monitoring the chain of thought of reasoning models for signs of reward hacking. Across two systemic-hacking settings, the paper reported 95% recall from a chain-of-thought monitor, compared with 60% for a monitor that saw only actions; it also found that direct pressure on the reasoning trace could make misconduct harder to observe. He was named among the leadership and foundational contributors to Deep Research and appeared in the GPT-5 contributor record. These credits do not make any one model his creation. They establish something more exact: responsibility for the research direction, optimisation practice and evaluation culture through which several consequential systems were developed.
FigureAsia selection
Why Jakub Pachocki is on the list
FigureAsia selected Pachocki for combining high-level scientific responsibility with evidence of technical depth. GPT-4’s official record assigns him both overall and optimisation leadership; OpenAI Five documents his role in research direction; the 2025 monitoring study addresses a central problem created by more autonomous reasoning. His influence is not best measured by a single paper or benchmark. It lies in shaping how large teams convert algorithms, compute and evaluation into systems used at international scale—and in confronting the failure modes those systems introduce.
Verified work
The 2025–26 record
Verified contribution 01
Co-author of Detecting Misbehaviour in Frontier Reasoning Models in 2025; in two reward-hacking settings, its chain-of-thought monitor achieved 95% recall versus 60% for action-only monitoring.
Verified contribution 02
The same study found that heavy direct optimisation against the monitor could make reasoning less legible, an important caveat for chain-of-thought oversight.
Verified contribution 03
Named in the leadership and foundational-contributor credits for Deep Research in 2025.
Verified contribution 04
Named in the official GPT-5 contributor record in 2025; this is a team credit, not evidence of sole model authorship.
Field context
The work in its field
The models and research programmes Pachocki has helped direct are used and examined across languages, industries and jurisdictions. His technical choices influence the global conversation on model capability, evaluation, monitoring and responsible deployment.
Foundation models under his scientific direction are widely used by Asian developers and institutions, while his monitoring research addresses risks that cross national and linguistic boundaries.
FigureAsia U35 Assessment
Assessment breakdown
94.7out of 100
Defining contribution
24.3 / 25
A completed piece of work, institution or system that materially changes what the field can do.
Demonstrated impact and reach
19.2 / 20
Observable adoption, scientific use, policy consequence or operational reach, with self-reported metrics labelled as such.
Personal agency and attribution
14.1 / 15
Evidence that the individual shaped the result, separated from team, employer and investor halo.
Technical or institutional originality
13.95 / 15
A new method, product form, research direction, governance mechanism or deployment model.
Durability and field-shaping influence
9.7 / 10
The likelihood that the contribution will remain useful beyond a single news cycle or model release.
Evidence integrity and responsible practice
9 / 10
The quality of the record, the precision of claims and the seriousness with which limitations and harms are addressed.
Asia–world relevance
4.45 / 5
A documented connection to Asia, impact on Asian systems, or clear importance to the region’s place in the international field.