Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) produces rich training experience, yet outcome rewards reduce each attempt to a single number and leave most of this information unused. Training-time scaffolds, such as strategies or hints added to the prompt during training, offer a natural way to turn this information into guidance, but their design and adaptation are largely left to humans and tailored to specific domains. We introduce AutoScaffold, a unified AI-for-AI framework that turns a student's training experience into adaptive scaffolds, with minimal domain-specific information and no human intervention during training. A frozen teacher periodically examines this experience, diagnoses bottlenecks, and designs scaffolds in two forms: (i) strategies shared across a class of tasks and (ii) hints for individual hard tasks, adjusting the content and amount of support as the student learns. The scaffolds are removed at evaluation. We apply the same framework to ALFWorld, search-based QA, mathematical reasoning, and GPU kernel generation. When evaluated without scaffolds, students trained with AutoScaffold outperform those trained with the corresponding RL baselines in all four domains, with gains of 7.2 points in ALFWorld success and 4.0 points in average QA exact match. On GPU kernel generation, AutoScaffold increases the fraction of tasks with a correct kernel that runs faster than the PyTorch reference by up to 5.0 points. On math, our student surpasses QuestA's reported accuracy using approximately one-third as many student training steps. Analyses show that the teacher identifies a different failure in each task class and shifts its scaffolds from step-by-step workflows to targeted fixes as the student improves, and that its revised scaffolds help the student learn more than keeping the previous scaffold or using no scaffold.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14515
Business process automation runs the same Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) again and again on new inputs. Large Language Model (LLM) agents can follow an SOP written in natural language, but they call an LLM to choose every step of every run, which adds latency and cost at scale. We present ReTrace, which turns an SOP and a few logged agent runs into a reusable workflow in which code, not an LLM, selects the next step. The agent's reasoning, the explanation it writes with each tool call, often states why it took an action; the tool calls alone do not. ReTrace extracts the condition behind each step, merges these conditions across runs into a compact rule document, and generates an executable workflow from it. Only this last stage depends on the platform, so rule documents can be compiled for different orchestration platforms. On $79$ procedures from our production platform, ReTrace workflows reach $93.8\%$ completion, against $96.8\%$ for the agent, at $24\%$ lower cost per task. On $\tau^2$-Bench, they reach $75.8\%$ task success (agent: $80.6\%$) and run in $1.3$s instead of $170$s; three rounds of repair on training failures lift $k{=}2$ workflows from $66.7\%$ to $81.2\%$. On eight SOP-Bench procedures, ReTrace without repair trails few-shot generation ($80.6\%$ vs. $83.6\%$), but repair from labeled training failures lifts it to $87.8\%$ at $0.40$s per task, compared to $85.5\%$ in $46.6$s for the agent.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14492
Visual Question Answering (VQA) imposes substantial computational overhead on vision-language models (VLMs), motivating model-agnostic input reduction methods that can be readily applied across diverse VLMs, including in black-box settings. Simply enforcing a visual-token cap reduces computation, but it can discard information needed to answer the question. A single reduction strategy also struggles to accommodate different scenarios. Our key observation is that cropping and compression are complementary: cropping highlights small targets and local details, whereas whole-image compression better preserves context for large targets or distributed evidence. Based on this observation, we propose C$^2$-Routing, which adaptively selects cropping or compression according to the input image and question. Since both strategies may still discard key information, we further design a safety gate that uses the predicted joint correctness distribution under original and reduced inputs to guide fallback and protect accuracy. To accommodate consumer GPU resource constraints, all training and evaluation experiments run on RTX 3090 GPUs. To measure gains beyond token capping, we use full-image baselines with the same cap of 1,024 visual tokens. We conduct extensive evaluation on three VLMs and 18 datasets spanning local details, global scenes, scene text, and documents. With the visual budget already capped, C$^2$-Routing further reduces end-to-end FLOPs by 36.53% and visual tokens by 42.36% on average, with a mean relative task-score decrease of only 0.77%.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14469
UTF-8's role as the de facto encoding standard in language models introduces cross-lingual inequities due to its variable-length design. However, the effect that this encoding choice has on model performance remains largely unexamined. In this work, we investigate how text encoding impacts the performance of byte-level language models, comparing UTF-8 with a wide range of other encoding strategies, including other Unicode-based approaches, language-specific encodings, and our own customized encodings. To facilitate our analysis, we propose Aether: a hybrid encoding scheme that uses script-specific encodings for our target setting while maintaining full Unicode coverage through UTF-8 fallbacks, using this framework to model four orthographically diverse languages. Surprisingly, we find that while languages with information-dense characters (Chinese, Korean) significantly benefit from compressive encodings, languages whose characters carry less information individually (Georgian, Tamil) are largely insensitive to encoding choice. In light of these findings, we argue that text encoding should be a language-specific design decision, rather than a universal default.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14459
Deepfake detectors are commonly evaluated on real/fake classification alone, but real-world applications require explanations of the visual evidence behind each prediction. Joint vision-language models struggle with authenticity assessment, producing "real" narratives for manipulated images. To address this, we propose a decoupled predict-then-explain pipeline as our submission to the ACM Multimedia 2026 Explainable Deepfake Detection Challenge, with methods trained and evaluated on the XPlainVerse benchmark. A vision-foundation-model ensemble first classifies the image, then a Qwen3-VL-8B model generates a decision-conditioned explanation of the visual evidence. For fake images, a second Qwen3-VL-8B compresses that text into a short non-expert summary without using the image. We further apply metric-aligned Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) to optimize both explainers against the challenge criteria. Under matched conditions, GRPO raises complex BERTScore-F1 from 0.686 to 0.712 and also improves grounding (entity and evidence F1); our submission ranked first on complex BERTScore-F1 and seventh overall.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14436
Local language models can save memory by storing weights in fewer bits, and they can reduce sensitivity to the order of answer options by averaging a few reorderings. We ask whether the first makes the second worse, and which is the cheaper way to spend a fixed budget. On Qwen3-0.6B and Qwen3-1.7B with simulated round-to-nearest weight quantization (8, 6, 4 and 3 bits, fp16 reference), read from the logits of the letters A to D on ARC-Easy, ARC-Challenge, MMLU and HellaSwag (300 items each), 6 bits lose no accuracy against fp16 (they score +1.8 (+1.0 to +2.5) and +0.9 (+0.3 to +1.5) points higher, which we do not explain), and 8 bits change it by -0.7 (-1.1 to -0.3) and -0.4 (-0.7 to -0.2) points. At 4 bits the answer-slot skew rises from 0.15 to 0.53 (0.6B) and from 0.07 to 0.12 (1.7B); Gaussian noise at the same weight SNR gives 0.15 and 0.37 (two draws) and 0.19 (one draw), so the control is inconclusive on whether rounding adds slot skew beyond equal-power noise. Flip rates rise but stay below an accuracy-matched baseline of independent uniform errors. Averaging four cyclic orders recovers +12.6 points at 4 bits for 0.6B (+5.3 at fp16). We price bits and passes in one machine-independent unit, weight bytes read times passes. In cost-matched pairs, extra orders beat extra bits only when the weights have 6 or more bits, and the decision table reduces to: use 6-bit weights and spend the rest of the budget on up to four orders, one pass each. Everything is simulated on two small models with the simplest quantizer; a title-level search found no earlier study of quantization together with option order.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14413
Diffusion Language Models (DLMs) have emerged as effective alternatives to autoregressive models for latency-critical tasks, enabling faster token generation. Recent advances employ block diffusion with self-editing capabilities, where each block refines tokens iteratively before advancing to the next one. Yet each block is only as fast as its slowest token, and the next block cannot start before it. We suggest Blurring the Block Boundaries (B3), a novel method with which two blocks are refined in parallel within a shared forward pass. B3 calibrates itself on the fly, opening the next block only once the model is ready to start generating it. It is a training-free and hyperparameter-free acceleration method which seamlessly integrates within any self-editing block diffusion model. Evaluated on state-of-the-art DLMs across 10 diverse datasets spanning varied tasks and difficulty levels, B3 results in on par generation quality and 11.5-14.5% speedup compared to the base model, pushing the Pareto frontier for latency-quality trade-offs in DLM inference.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14387
Energy-based models (EBMs) define a distribution through a scalar energy, $p_\theta(x)\propto\exp(-E_\theta(x))$, and are usually presented as one model family among many. This tutorial has a broader goal: beyond introducing EBMs, it uses them as a single lens that connects the different aspects of machine learning. Any EBM is specified by three choices, the energy, which determines what the model represents; the inference procedure, which samples from or optimizes the energy; and the learning method, which fits the energy to data. We first develop these components, including sampling, variational inference, and learning by maximum likelihood, noise contrastive estimation, pseudolikelihood, score matching, and adversarial training, and show that the learning methods share one contrastive structure. We then show that discriminative models, generative models such as GANs, normalizing flows, diffusion and autoregressive models, representation learning methods such as contrastive learning, word2vec, BERT, denoising auto-encoders, and diffusion representations, reinforcement learning with EBM policies and world models, inverse reinforcement learning, and planning, as well as inference-time computation with verifiers, are all EBMs that differ in these three choices, mostly in how they handle the partition function and sampling. This view explains existing methods, organizes them into a common framework, and suggests new algorithms by replacing one component while keeping the others, with composition of energies as a principled way to combine learned models at inference time.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14383
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly exhibit capabilities that resemble human Learning by Thinking (LbT), the acquisition of new insight through internal processes such as explanation and reasoning, without new external input. A systematic account of the cognitive mechanisms behind these capabilities, and of their limits, remains underdeveloped. This paper proposes a Cognitive LbT Framework that maps four mechanisms (Reflective Reasoning, Synthetic Memory Formation, Internal Simulation, and Conceptual Self-Organization) onto computational processes in LLMs. Drawing on representative methods, including chain-of-thought prompting, self-consistency, self-reflection, Tree-of-Thoughts search, Self-Instruct, and self-taught reasoning, the analysis argues that selected methods can functionally approximate aspects of these mechanisms and can improve performance on some tasks without additional labeled examples, although this does not always constitute durable learning in model parameters. For example, Self-Instruct generated approximately 52,000 instructions from 175 seed tasks and reported a 33% absolute improvement on Super-NaturalInstructions (Y. Wang et al., 2023). The same mechanisms also produce characteristic failures, including hallucination diffusion, model collapse, concept drift, and high computational cost. These failures are not isolated technical defects but follow from four structural asymmetries between LLMs and human cognition: the identity of generator and monitor, closed learning loops without external grounding, symbolic rather than sensorimotor simulation, and the cost of inference-time computation. The framework yields testable propositions about when LbT in LLMs should succeed or fail and offers a structured basis for designing more reliable autonomous learning systems.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14382
Retrieval-augmented systems often retrieve passages that are accurate and relevant but state the answer at a coarser level of granularity than the question requires. For example, a question may ask which specific disease a drug treats (familial hyperlipidemia), while the retrieved passage mentions the broader disease family (hyperlipidemia). Prior work on context sufficiency treats such coarse passages simply as insufficient. We argue that they form a distinct case, which we call resolvable insufficiency: text alone cannot settle the fine-grained answer, but the broader category it mentions maps to a short list of candidate answers in a domain ontology. When language models read these coarse, family-only passages, they exhibit a phenomenon we call Clade (Category-Level Answering from Deficient Evidence): they answer instead of abstaining or searching further. On biomedical questions from PrimeKG, family-only passages reduce abstention by 13.8 points compared to uninformative passages, and the resulting guesses are wrong about half the time. A counterfactual test confirms the cause: replacing an exact disease name with its broader family name lowers abstention by 17.4 points compared to deleting the sentence. Simple fixes like confidence filtering, scaling to a larger model, and explicitly instructing the model to abstain cannot resolve Clade, and this replicates on ecological species interactions in GloBI. Finally, we test whether an ontology can turn coarse passages into exact answers. Given the correct family, an ontology list includes the true answer in 98.5% of cases, but string matching finds that family on the page for only 19.8%. Letting the model choose the family raises this to 30.0% and end-to-end recovery from 10.0% to 26.8%. Overall, our results show when language models should stop guessing and consult an ontology, and highlight which steps of that process remain unsolved.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14355
Users often complain that AI assistants such as ChatGPT are getting worse. Some versions do change, but human evaluation leaves a second possibility untested: the people judging may change. We separate the two on Chatbot Arena, a public platform where people compare answers from two anonymous large language models (LLMs) and pick the better one or say both are bad. We study 1,260,967 blind votes cast from May 2023 to August 2024 on pairs of models whose versions are fixed: dated vendor snapshots and models with fixed open weights. For the same pair of unchanged models, the share of votes saying "both are bad" rises by 1.71 percentage points a month on a mean of 17.1%, and by 1.91 points a month in 2024. In fourteen pairs observed often in both 2023 and 2024, it rose in every one, from 15.5% to 23.3%. The ranking does not trend: in 2024, the stronger model's share of decisive votes is flat. The rise holds within the same voter and on the same pair, and across arrival cohorts from their first recorded vote. It holds with prompt controls, in every major language, for dated vendor snapshots, open-weight models and models with stable answer length, and between interface changes. The drift is shared across models: month effects estimated from other models' pairs remove it from each model's own pairs. Platform-wide, the average model would be expected to score 78% against the 2023 average, yet the share of "both are bad" votes ended near where it began. The pattern fits a standard that follows the category's progress, so a product that stands still is judged as declining. Absolute verdicts on AI drifted while relative comparisons held steady, an evaluation drift that matters for LLM leaderboards and for the human feedback used to train models.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14333
Text encoders turn earnings calls into vectors for search, for language models that answer from retrieved passages, and for forecasting models. A live retriever can use an encoder trained once on all available text, as finance retrievers are, but a backtest needs an encoder that read no text written after the date of each vector. To address this look-ahead bias, from 412,248 calls we train vintages under four pretraining recipes, with yearly cutoffs from 2010 to 2024, and each vintage reads only text dated on or before its cutoff. We then fine-tune each vintage on the question-answer pairs of the calls themselves. The vintages we train on calls alone, with 33.8M parameters, retrieve answers on held-out calls better than the general retrievers we tested in every test quarter. Their vectors also raise by about half the rank correlation between next-day returns and forecasts built from past returns and firm size. When each vintage continues the previous one, a later vintage retrieves better on earlier quarters than the vintage available at the time, and a point-in-time language model that answers from the passages the later vintage retrieves inherits the gain. The 2024 vintage of our families also forecasts earnings surprises better, although the interval of this gain includes zero on calls that no vintage read. It forecasts returns no better, so point-in-time vintages matter most for retrieval and little for forecasts of returns.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14325
Many open mixture-of-experts (MoE) language models train with Muon instead of AdamW. Most balance the load with a bias on each expert's routing score, adjusted after every step. Their recipes disagree on whether Muon should also train the router. In models with 55M and 108M active parameters, we measure how the optimizer changes the span of these biases, the largest minus the smallest in a layer. The span grows when all tokens favor the same experts, so it shows how hard a layer is to balance. At learning rates tuned on shorter runs, Muon raised the span of the first MoE layer at every seed, roughly doubling it on average, while the other layers changed much less. The rise came from Muon on the rest of the network, whichever optimizer trained the router. In those runs, the inputs to the first router shared a direction, and soon after the warmup its busiest expert averaged four to seven times its fair share. Over the first 3,000 steps, subtracting the batch mean from these inputs removed this overload while barely changing the loss. On the smaller model, halving Muon's learning rate removed most of the rise and slightly improved the loss. Moving only the router to AdamW made the loads shift more during the warmup and slightly raised the loss, so at this scale the results favor keeping the router on Muon.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.37914
Evaluating candidate parallelization strategies through distributed training runs makes strategy selection prohibitively expensive at scale. Performance simulation offers a lower cost alternative, yet controlled comparisons among existing simulators remain difficult because they differ in the training stages they model and the workloads on which they are evaluated. We introduce LM-SimBench, a unified framework, profiling dataset, and benchmark for evaluating LLM training simulators. The framework decomposes simulation into functional stages from model compilation to schedule level aggregation, connecting execution representations and cost estimators to measurable evaluation targets. Following this framework, we profile 23 model settings from 10 dense and Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) LLM families on an Ascend Neural Processing Unit (NPU) cluster. The resulting dataset contains 348 feasible configurations that jointly vary five parallelism dimensions and activation recomputation, with six views spanning configuration, rank, operator, event, and kernel granularity. Evaluations of representative training simulators demonstrate how LM-SimBench supports comparisons of prediction accuracy, assessment of configuration selection, and diagnosis of prediction errors. Matched GPU-NPU experiments validate the cross-platform applicability of the collection and evaluation protocol and demonstrate NPU-guided GPU configuration selection.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14285
We introduce DyShip, a framework for classifying speaker familiarity and kinship from dyadic conversations in the Seamless Interaction corpus. We compare five speech representations: spectrograms, MFCCs, self-supervised WavLM representations, x-vectors, and estimated articulatory movements. Spectral features perform best for familiarity classification, reaching an accuracy of 87.81%, while WavLM achieves the highest kinship accuracy of 85.17%. X-vectors and articulatory features yield weaker results on familiarity classifiaction, but shine for kinship classification, with an AUC of 0.909 for x-vectors. Most classifiers exceed previously reported human and audio language model scores on the same dataset. These findings highlight the potential of conventional acoustic features for relationship inference and motivate further investigation of the conversational cues captured by different representations.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14241
Variability in syntactic structure and parsing ambiguity are fundamental aspects of natural language which modern LLMs have to learn to deal with proficiently. Previous "post-mortem" studies have shown that fully trained Transformers indeed approximate canonical parsing algorithms such as inside-outside, but little is established theoretically about how this is actually learned. Here, we make a first step towards addressing this by studying the learning dynamics in synthetic context-free grammars with variable parse tree topology. The stagewise learning curves are fully interpretable, in the sense that all of the loss stages a) can be computed analytically, and b) can be clearly associated to the representation of a hidden latent tree variable, which allows to lift ambiguity and utilize information from wider contexts. By probing representations, we visualize the emergence of inside-outside computation across depth and during training: while during early stages local (bigram/trigram) information is used and involves only a few initial layers, gradually the Transformer develops an encoder-decoder structure where the most abstract latent information is encoded in the middle, and the latter half of the network is used to progressively refine the final token prediction. This organization of computation is reminiscent of findings in real-world LLMs, and importantly applies here to a synthetic model which allows full analytical control of the data statistics, thus opening the door to theoretical progress.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14221
Software agents built on large language models generate traffic unlike human web traffic, yet routers have no class for it and cannot verify a sender's claim to be an agent. This paper proposes the Verifiable Agentic Traffic Class (VATC), which combines a reserved Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) value declaring agent traffic, a router-side classifier that demotes flows contradicting the declaration to a class served after best-effort traffic, and a rate-limited priority queue. VATC was compared with static Differentiated Services (DiffServ), a dedicated class that trusts the marking, and fq_codel, a per-flow fair-queuing scheduler, in two simulators and on a real Linux kernel. VATC matched DiffServ under steady load. In a constructed burst it cut mean agent queuing delay by 98% relative to DiffServ in simulation (assuming an immediate verdict), at a 12% increase in human delay; most of the gain came from the separate class. Under a spoofed flood in the kernel, the rate limit held human latency 11 times below DiffServ's. Without verification, DiffServ and a tightly configured fq_codel gave legitimate agents lower latency than VATC; a live four-feature classifier then demoted all 20 bulk-shaped spoofers and gave agents 0.30 ms, but missed six spoofers that copied the agent pattern. With emulated network delay, a timing feature of the classifier stopped separating agent from human flows. In real agent harnesses on a congested link, router queueing took 13% to 63% of task time, depending on harness and assumed model latency. The traffic was synthetic or sandbox-scale.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14211
During extended wakefulness, mammalian neocortical networks experience localized periods of transient neuronal silence termed off-states. Here, we examine how analogous spatiotemporally concentrated disruptions affect sequential reasoning in autoregressive Large Language Models (LLMs). Evaluating 250 paired derivations on the GSM8K benchmark across two 8B models (Qwen3-8B and LLaMA-3.1-8B-Instruct), we contrast clustered bursts of attention head masking against budget-matched diffuse i.i.d. dropout. Concentrated bursts induce substantial reasoning degradation: at onset parameter $\mathcal{B}=0.10$ (scheduling $\sim 5.7\%$ of vulnerable head-token volume), Qwen3-8B accuracy drops from $91.2\%$ under diffuse noise to $78.8\%$ under burst dropout ($\Delta = -12.4$ percentage points [pp], exact McNemar $p = 5.5 \times 10^{-6}$), while LLaMA-3.1-8B-Instruct drops from $84.0\%$ to $76.8\%$ ($\Delta = -7.2$ pp, $p = 0.0198$). Conversely, dispersing the identical cumulative budget uniformly across generation steps via stratified quintile matching yields substantially milder degradation (retaining $91.2\%$ in Qwen and $84.0\%$ in LLaMA). In an exploratory factorial dissociation ($N=100$), single-step dropout density is associated with an acute drop in a single schedule draw ($-10.0$ pp on Qwen, $p_{\text{holm}} = 0.0425$), while multi-token continuity exhibits an inconclusive compounding trend ($-7.0$ pp, $p_{\text{holm}} = 0.1892$). Error analysis reveals that Qwen failures reflect derivation errors within formatted responses (conditional accuracy drop of $-11.4$ pp), whereas in LLaMA $22.2\%$ of discordant losses lack a final answer format line (conditional gap narrows to $-5.0$ pp). These findings demonstrate that autoregressive reasoning chains are particularly vulnerable to concentrated structural disruptions, providing empirical benchmarks for fault tolerance in transformer architectures.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14209
Repeated sampling with majority selection is an effective means of enforcing self-consistency in large language models. Recently, a variant has also been introduced that terminates early to save costs when the output distribution is favorable. But it still cannot yield a correct confidence estimate from the answer distribution. For this issue, we formalize this as majority identification under an unknown distribution with a budget and a target error rate, and propose BARS, a sequential rule certifying the top-two gap and returning an early stop, a budgeted majority vote, or a refusal when feasibility cannot be established. A refusal is a statement about the rule and its budget, not a claim that a question is unanswerable, and it tells practitioners when to widen the budget or switch models. A certified mode carries proven bounds on the joint answering error and on refusing an instance the budget could handle, while a practical mode, used in our experiments, replaces them with empirical calibration. On synthetic instances drawn from known distributions over thousands of seeds, the difficulty-driven behavior is recovered and the price of the certified mode is this http URL GSM8K the practical mode draws 22.3\% fewer samples than fixed-8 sampling over the same pool, refused questions included, at the cost of declining 18.8\% of the questions. On MATH, it greatly improves the accuracy of its output answers into 82.5\% at the cost of honestly refusing to answer half of the difficult questions that the model itself is unable to solve.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14171
Large language models have demonstrated strong capabilities in structured reasoning and code generation, yet identifying an assembly fault does not guarantee the ability to generate executable rework programs. In interlocking assemblies, a locally plausible repair program may violate blocking dependencies, omit required recovery operations, or terminate in an incorrect configuration. We identify this challenge as fault-conditioned executable rework generation, where models must jointly reason about structural failures and generate programs that restore constrained assembly states. To benchmark this capability, we introduce FORGE-Bench, containing 4,000 tasks across 26 interlocking assemblies with five assemblies held out for evaluating generalization to unseen structures. We further propose FORGE (Fault-Oriented Rework Code Generation for Executable Interlocking Assembly), a structured state-to-program framework that decomposes rework generation into Rework Structuring and Action Grounding. Rework Structuring captures fault-induced recovery dependencies, while Action Grounding maps these dependencies into state-conditioned executable actions. Experiments show that locally reasonable repair code is insufficient for reliable assembly recovery, and that connecting structural recovery reasoning with executable action realization is essential for verified target restoration.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.02536