The widespread adoption of generative artificial intelligence in recent years has brought a parallel rise in prompt injection and jailbreak attacks. By embedding malicious instructions, these exploits manipulate language models to bypass intended behavior and operational boundaries. In traditional chatbots, such attacks are confined to a single session because state memory is not preserved across conversations. However, persistent memory features in modern conversational interfaces enable cross-session attack propagation, establishing a threat vector known as memory injection. This work explores this emerging vulnerability in leading LLM-as-a-service platforms, highlighting its real-world severity and the need for countermeasures. While existing literature focuses on violations tailored to specific platform features, we present a general threat model. We demonstrate that all NIST attack goals are collectively achievable across ChatGPT Instant 5.3, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Gemini 3 Flash under this model. We also show that memory injections can exploit multiple attack vectors, including personal memories, projects, skills, organization instructions, and Model Context Protocol (MCP)-connected resources. Our findings reveal that all evaluated services can be manipulated to persistently spread disinformation, generate harmful content, or simulate offline unresponsiveness, even in fresh sessions. In the particular case of Claude, shared-memory features allow an attacker to compromise multiple users within an organization and also exfiltrate user prompts. To address these vulnerabilities, we derive defense mechanisms from our proposed threat model and foundational cybersecurity principles. Our analysis indicates that nearly half of these mitigations remain unimplemented across the target services. Datasets and attack artifacts are available at this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28810
In case-based legal reasoning, legal professionals identify legally significant fact patterns in a new dispute and compare them with those of decided cases. In AI & Law, HYPO dimensions and CATO factors represent these patterns symbolically, organizing expert knowledge distilled from case narratives as explicit, structured, interpretable, and auditable legal concepts and relations that support case comparison, legal argument, and precedent-based reasoning. Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for legal tasks, yet their internal organization of legal knowledge remains difficult to trace. We investigate whether LLMs form internal representations corresponding to all 26 CATO factors. Two research questions examine linear decodability and sparse localization with sparse autoencoders. Experiments cover three open models, Qwen3-1.7B, Qwen3-8B, and Gemma-2 2B, supported by cross-model comparison and human audit of controlled natural-language passages. Results show that all 26 factors are linearly decodable in all three models. Single-feature sparse readouts cover the complete factor catalog, with best-layer test AUCs ranging from 0.86 to 1.00. Five selected features approach full-vector readout performance. We report 78 model-specific layer-feature coordinates, one for each factor in each model. Together, these results show that information corresponding to expert-defined legal factors can be read from the internal activations of LLMs processing legal narratives. By locating these readouts, our study connects legal language and the symbolic abstractions of HYPO and CATO to learned internal representations.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28799
We introduce CALLIOPE, a top-down framework for discovering topic hierarchies in large corpora of unstructured data (e.g., LLM conversations), while supporting differential privacy (DP). Unlike traditional and even recent LLM-augmented approaches that ultimately rely on clustering vector embeddings, our framework leverages LLM capabilities directly for the entire pipeline. Experiments demonstrate that this approach provides better utility over existing (embedding-based) methods in the DP setting, especially in the high privacy regime. We evaluate the quality of CALLIOPE outputs using a variety of traditionally studied clustering metrics, as well as some novel utility metrics that we introduce.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28797
Evaluations of large language model (LLM) agents report that pricing agents collude at others' expense. Yet collusion is defined by enforcement: a cartel, in which competitors share monopoly profits, holds only if a member who cheats is punished. We introduce an audit that tests enforcement by forcing a member to cheat in counterfactual copies of a market, and use it to study what reinforcement learning (RL) teaches agents in pricing and trading. Small LLMs trained by RL learn what their training rivals reward, but only what they readily try. In self-play, they learn fixed rules ignoring their rivals; against a punishing rival, to be deterred; against a cheating rival, to match its cuts, never the costly price war that would deter it, which they rarely try. A war forced into training is learned, but mostly only where it was forced. Against their own copies, deterred and matching agents can earn the same cartel profits, but only matching ones can enforce them, and then thinly: as a by-product and only against large cuts. Q-learners enforce collusion only in pricing. Prompted LLMs reach cartel-like outcomes mostly through rules that ignore the market. Outcome measures cannot tell these cases apart; the audit can.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28787
Psychotherapy fidelity assessment measures how faithfully a therapist adheres to a treatment protocol, a critical determinant of positive patient outcomes. However, fidelity assessment is bottlenecked by manual expert review, rendering the process labor-intensive and unscalable. To scale therapy supervision and support clinician self-learning, we present an integrated application of large language models (LLMs) that automates psychotherapy fidelity workflows and generates actionable supervisory feedback from authentic, long-form clinical transcripts. We evaluate three open-weight models across multiple task decomposition configurations and reasoning strategies, demonstrating that evidence-first reasoning improves fidelity estimation. Furthermore, we establish the framework's external construct validity on an independent randomized controlled trial (RCT), where it reliably distinguishes Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) from non-CBT sessions across core therapeutic skills. Through a user study that evaluates the generated feedback, mental health experts indicate that the pipeline synthesizes actionable clinical feedback. Ultimately, our work offers a practical, scalable solution toward bridging the community mental health supervision gap.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28772
RLVR improves language-model reasoning, but commonly relies on independent stochastic rollouts for exploration, which can repeatedly sample similar failed strategies. Prior work has seen success with approaches that guide exploration by introducing dependence into the sampling process by including incorrect solutions in the context for subsequent attempts. Still, these methods introduce the additional question of how to assign credit to each attempt. We propose to view the credit assignment through the lens of Stochastic Shortest Paths, a framework in classical reinforcement learning that seeks to minimize the expected cumulative cost to reach a terminal state (in our case, a verified successful response). We show that, under suitable simplifying assumptions, this perspective naturally leads to a simple modification to GRPO, which we call Retry-Aware Policy Optimization (ReAPO). ReAPO allocates additional generation to failed trajectories, allowing successful retries to be reinforced without rewarding preceding failures, and assigns credit in a theoretically principled way to each attempt. Across Qwen3 and OLMo-2 models from 0.6B to 4B and eight mathematical and scientific reasoning benchmarks, ReAPO improves first-attempt performance over GRPO as well as natural recent baseline algorithms, while additional ablations demonstrate the utility of both serial sampling and ReAPO's credit assignment. On Qwen3-0.6B, ReAPO also outperforms GRPO with twice the group size or twice the training steps, reaching their peak accuracy with 39% and 31% fewer generated tokens, respectively. Taken together, our results suggest that ReAPO is a simple yet effective approach for improving LM reasoning performance through improved exploration and retry-aware credit assignment.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28770
Current evaluation of LLMs on benchmarks typically aggregates performance over individual examples into a single scalar score. This approach is overly coarse and ignores the diverse scope of skills covered by benchmark datasets. To address this limitation and better exploit benchmark data, we propose SkillEval, a new evaluation framework that performs cross-model, skill-level analysis. The framework integrates advances from two areas: (1) it leverages the meta-cognitive capabilities of LLMs to automatically discover interpretable skills from questions, and (2) it applies cognitive diagnosis models (CDMs) from psychometrics to estimate per-skill abilities of LLMs. We conduct experiments on 3,811 LLMs evaluated on 9,523 items across five benchmarks spanning diverse domains (MATH, BBH, GPQA, MuSR, IFEval). Compared to the traditional average-based evaluation paradigm, SkillEval produces reliable, more calibrated and informative yet concise model profiles that more accurately predict model behavior on unseen items. We also demonstrate the utility of SkillEval in two downstream tasks: (1) LLM routing, which dynamically assigns each query to a capable but efficient model, reducing inference cost by over 60% while achieving improved performance, and (2) Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT), where an unseen model can be efficiently evaluated using a trained CDM. Furthermore, we show that these skill profiles provide useful insights, for example, how benchmarks share skills and how instruction-tuned models differ from their base models.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28767
Agentic artificial intelligence (AI) systems hold immense potential for automating complex workflows in materials discovery and design, but extending them to domain-intensive mechanistic investigations remains challenging. Here, we present GBClaw, an agentic AI framework for investigating the structure and deformation of general grain boundaries (GBs). Although general GBs constitute the vast majority of real-world interfaces in polycrystalline materials, they remain understudied because their structural complexity and interfacial mismatch complicate experimental and modeling research. GBClaw integrates large language models (LLMs) into a modular architecture comprising an orchestrator, specialized agents, domain-specific tools, simulation interfaces, and hierarchical memory. Through dynamic replanning and iterative workflow refinement, the framework effectively connects systematic simulations with targeted mechanistic analysis. Applied to 14 general asymmetric tilt GBs in nickel, GBClaw characterized interfacial defect structures and identified diverse deformation modes across these incommensurate boundaries. Comparing boundary sliding with and without secondary GB misfit dislocations revealed substantial differences in shear strength, underscoring the critical role of defect hierarchies in sliding resistance. Furthermore, researcher-guided follow-up calculations traced an anomalously high shear resistance to metastable boundary structures. This work demonstrates that combining agentic AI with domain expertise bridges high-throughput computational screening with deep physical understanding of complex material interfaces.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28629
Modern distributed microservice deployments generate massive volumes of heterogeneous, multi-format observability logs across physically and logically partitioned infrastructure. Isolating root causes during cascading failures remains an arduous task for Site Reliability Engineers (SREs), bottlenecked by manual keyword filtering and disjointed temporal correlation across monitoring dashboards. We introduce Semantic Observability, an autonomous multi-agent framework that unifies disparate log streams into a dynamic, queryable Property Graph Database. By modeling physical infrastructure topologies, logical software dependencies, and chronological event sequences as attributed nodes and directed relations, it bridges the semantic gap inherent in flat, unstructured log repositories. Building on this unified substrate, we deploy a stateful multi-agent system orchestrated through Directed Cyclic Graphs (DCGs). The system autonomously navigates the topology, applying causal graph algorithms and temporal back-traversal to isolate the precise blast radius of anomalies. The pruned subgraph is then interpreted by a Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning engine to generate contextualized, code-level Root Cause Analyses (RCA) and actionable remediations. This paper establishes the foundational system architecture, formal relational ontology, and multi-agent control loops of Semantic Observability. We show conceptually how the framework eliminates ambient telemetry noise, reduces Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR), compresses LLM token consumption, and prevents structural hallucinations. We also specify an open-source validation framework on standard benchmarks (LogHub and Train-Ticket), laying the groundwork for a forthcoming companion paper on exhaustive quantitative evaluation and production benchmarking.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28611
Current evaluation of LLM-generated debate largely focuses on argumentative quality, leaving the value structure of generated arguments underexamined. We introduce a diagnostic metric framework for comparing how values are expressed and organized in human-reference and AI-generated debates. The framework separates value expression, the range of recognizable values a debate invokes, from value organization, how those values are distributed and sustained across turns. Grounded in Schwartz's Basic-10 value theory, it represents debates as multi-level value distributions over argumentative units, utterances, stances, and full debates, enabling metrics for value coverage, alignment, diffusion, and cross-turn dynamics. Across multiple generation systems, AI-generated debates are broadly value-expressive, often activating as many or more value dimensions than matched human references, but they organize these values differently. Their utterances are more locally value-diffuse, and source-blind judges distinguish value clarity from value focus. These findings show that debate evaluation should consider not only value presence, but also value organization. Code and supplementary materials are available at this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28604
Agentic on-policy distillation (OPD) trains a student agent on its own trajectories while a teacher scores every token. A natural explanation of where it goes wrong is compounding error: the student's mistakes carry its trajectories beyond the region where the teacher is reliable, so recent methods keep training inside that region, through episode-length curricula, teacher-guided turns, prefix replay, or teacher intervention where the two disagree. We show this explanation is incomplete. From the states where the student departs most from the teacher, the teacher's own takeovers still finish the task, yet the student trained on its token scores keeps running out of turns. We attribute this to the myopia of next-token scoring. The teacher rates each token without seeing where the episode ends, so its scores let through the safe, delaying moves that outcome-based RL would punish with zero reward, a penalty agentic OPD lacks. We call this difference between what the teacher does and what it scores the rollout-scorer gap. We propose Rollout-to-Scorer Distillation (R2S), which repairs the scorer before distillation by mining high-disagreement states from the untrained student, running teacher takeovers from them, keeping the states where enough takeovers pass a reward-free check such as consensus or an LLM judge, and fine-tuning the teacher to give its takeover-informed scores on every assistant token from the divergence turn onward, without the takeover in context. The repaired teacher is frozen as the sole scorer for standard OPD, requiring no task reward during repair or training. Across three environments, two teachers and four students, R2S outperforms three state-of-the-art agentic-OPD methods in all twelve teacher-student-environment cells, by 12.8 success points on average over the best of them in each cell. Project page: this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28586
Large Language Model (LLM) agents can handle increasingly complex tasks, navigating long trajectories of observations and actions. As these trajectories grow, key-value (KV) cache I/O and storage become the dominant cost. Trajectories can also exceed the LLM's maximum context length, requiring control over active cache growth. Prior work uses context engineering to reduce cache size by trimming or summarizing history. However, modifying the trajectory prefix invalidates subsequent cached states and triggers costly re-prefilling of retained context. Task accuracy can also suffer when too little context is retained to limit re-prefill costs. We propose cache engineering as a new scheme. It allows agents to directly control their active KV cache without modifying the trajectory or re-prefilling retained context. Specifically, agents can proactively use drop to exclude selected cache from future attention and repos to adjust retained keys' position encodings. We formalize these cache operations and identify history dependence as a serving challenge: identical token sequences can yield different cache states under different cache operation sequences, making prefix matching insufficient for correct cache reuse. Thus, we co-design the AKV serving engine. It provides a stateless interface compatible with existing serving APIs, while internally managing stateful cache reuse, eviction, and restoration. Experiments show that a tool-response rolling-drop cache policy improves average benchmark scores by 1.7 points and reduces average cost by 27.7%, compared with conventional threshold-triggered summarization. With AKV, it achieves up to 1.2x the output throughput and a 1.5x speedup in P95 request latency. Recursive self-improvement of cache policies further reduces cost by 7.1% over expert design. Our code is at this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28577
Generative retrieval (GR) casts search and recommendation as autoregressive generation of discrete semantic identifiers (SIDs). SID design largely determines GR quality, but its discrete, interdependent components (SID construction, collision handling, decoding, and training) cannot be optimized end-to-end with gradients and remain largely hand-designed. We introduce a framework that improves these components through LLM-driven evolutionary program search, to our knowledge the first application of this approach to GR. A locally served, open-weight 31B model mutates executable GR components, so no proprietary LLM API is used, and a 1M-parameter proxy decoder provides fast feedback in place of repeatedly training the 1B target generator. Across 21 SID programs on NQ320K, proxy and target Recall@100 show strong rank correlation (Spearman $\rho = 0.90$). Guided by this proxy, evolution improves the seed GR on NQ320K, MSMARCO300K, and a multilingual e-commerce dataset under a fixed training recipe. On NQ320K, jointly evolving SID construction and collision handling improves Recall@1 from 55.8% to 59.3% and Recall@100 from 85.8% to 90.6%. A component study shows that proxy reliability depends on what is evolved: improvements transfer reliably for the semantic index but not for the generator's training objective or the full pipeline. LLM-driven evolutionary search is thus a practical tool for GR design, provided proxy reliability is established for the chosen search space.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28568
Many scientific phenomena are best understood as outcomes of underlying optimization problems, yet automated scientific discovery has largely focused on recovering equations that describe observed input-output patterns. We introduce OptScientist, a novel automated framework for discovering compact symbolic optimization laws directly from data. OptScientist comprises (i) a model that infers symbolic optimization problems by first learning to represent data as an optimization problem and then extracting its symbolic form, and (ii) an LLM agentic system embedding the model in a discovery process that integrates theoretical priors from scientific literature, discovers candidate laws, abstracts their underlying mechanisms, and suggests new data to collect. We first evaluate OptScientist on OptFeynman, a novel benchmark of 99 physics-derived optimization problems, where OptScientist recovers ground-truth laws for over 80% of the problems and remains robust to noisy contextual information, while substantially outperforming machine-learning, symbolic, and LLM-based model-discovery baselines. On human risky choice and central-bank monetary policy, OptScientist discovers compact symbolic optimization laws that achieve held-out predictive performance competitive with leading baselines, while using few parameters and substantially fewer tokens than LLM baselines. Overall, OptScientist extends automated scientific discovery to uncovering optimization laws that generate observed phenomena, enabling automated theory building across the physical, biological, behavioral, and social sciences.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28562
Large language models (LLMs) can leverage semantic feature names alongside summary statistics for tabular feature selection, yet it remains unclear when such information improves subset selection relative to established statistical methods. We investigate this question within an 18-dataset framework comprising 10 datasets for Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) training, 2 for checkpoint validation, and 6 held-out evaluation datasets. We compare five classical baselines, frozen Qwen2.5-7B and Llama-3.3-70B selectors, and two GRPO-adapted Qwen2.5-7B models, reporting classification ROC-AUC and regression R^2 separately and using dataset-wise ranks for cross-task comparison. Across five seeded evaluation partitions, classical selectors generally achieve higher predictive performance than the tested 7B LLM/RL selectors, including under a pre-specified ~33% feature budget with strict train-only classical fitting, while the 7B selectors retain compact subsets. A cardinality-matched semantic sensitivity experiment shows that, for Zero-shot Qwen-7B, informative feature names improve regression performance over anonymized and shuffled alternatives (+0.1964 and +0.1606 mean R^2), whereas aggregate classification differences are smaller (+0.0159 and +0.0084 ROC-AUC) and dataset-dependent. These results characterize when semantic information benefits LLM-based feature selection and show that classical selectors remain strong baselines for predictive tabular feature selection.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28556
How can we effectively oversee AI systems that surpass human intelligence? AI Safety via Debate proposes that two AI systems argue opposing positions and a judge, either a human or a weaker model, decides which is correct. By facilitating supervisors in providing high-quality training signals, debate aims to encourage truthful and safe behavior from AI systems whose capabilities exceed our own. However, human judgment is not neutral: people often rely on biases which advanced AI systems may learn to exploit. Drawing on insights from collective intelligence and social cognition, this paper investigates whether debate can guide human and LLM supervisors toward the truth despite their prior beliefs. We evaluate several protocol configurations. We also explore setups inspired by the wisdom of the crowd such as the number and diversity of judges, as well as interaction mechanisms including deliberation and voting. Overall, we find that debate increases accuracy relative to prior beliefs for human judges, whereas the consultancy baseline, in which a single expert argues for one answer, does not. For weaker language models, however, the results are mixed: debate provides no comparable gains in most settings and can even reduce accuracy. Among multi-judge protocols, weighted voting produces the highest accuracy for human supervisors, whereas for LLMs none of them significantly improves group accuracy, even as the number of judges increases. Notably, the behavior of minority judges in non-diverse deliberation protocols suggests that, under symmetric settings, incorrect positions could be more persuasive than correct ones. These findings support debate as a viable path toward scalable human oversight, but cast doubt on its benefits for weaker AI supervisors, raising concerns about fully automated training and control pipelines in high-stakes settings.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28539
Decision models support routing, guardrails, and output verification in LLM systems. However, item accuracy alone cannot establish whether models make correct decisions across controlled variations or assign reliable confidence to their predictions. We introduce DecisionPivot, a diagnostic benchmark comprising 48 tasks and 40,033 items across seven decision roles. Its core track contains 7,800 items from 13 generated task families, organized into contrast groups with computed answers verified by independently implemented solvers. The complementary reference track contains 32,233 items from 35 public test sets, preserving their original evaluation metrics. We evaluate 40 decision models and 14 general models using documented, model-specific protocols, assessing item and contrast-group accuracy, probability ordering, calibration, and empirical selective coverage. Our results reveal substantial differences obscured by aggregate scores: two 27B models separated by only 2.6 points on the reference track achieve contrast-group accuracies of 70.1% and 44.2%. Across 2,400 binary contrast pairs, Perplexity Decider correctly ranks the positive member above the negative member in 92.3% of pairs but answers both members correctly in only 74.1%, exposing a gap between probability ordering and decision correctness. Models with similar item accuracy also differ in the reliability of their high-confidence predictions. On a separate 1,296-item subset, GLM-5.3 achieves 93.5\% contrast-group accuracy at a higher reasoning setting, compared with 81.5% at its lowest effort. By linking errors to pivotal details and difficulty levels, DecisionPivot provides fine-grained diagnostics of decision failures that aggregate evaluation alone cannot reveal.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28522
For efficient deployment of large language models (LLMs), methods of ultra-low-bit backbones reduce weight storage, memory traffic, and linear-layer execution cost, while multi-token prediction (MTP) methods reduce sequential decoding steps by predicting multiple future tokens in parallel. Although complementary, the direct combination of these methods cannot accelerate decoding at comparable quality: masked drafting lacks intermediate token input supplied in next-token training, while wider computation and causal key-value (KV) updates can offset the savings from fewer steps. To address these challenges, we propose BitMTP, an algorithm-system co-design framework for efficient MTP on ultra-low-bit LLM backbones. A joint next-token prediction and MTP objective equips a single model with both autoregressive (AR) generation and block-causal drafting. Confidence-only decoding, speculative-only decoding, and hybrid decoding provide different quality-throughput operating points without using separate draft and verifier models. Accepted-prefix alignment keeps the committed prefix, materialized causal KV boundary, and CUDA Graph replay state consistent for continued generation. BitMTP uses this contract to select width-specialized low-bit execution and reuse captured graphs over shared KV storage. On NVIDIA H20, BitMTP with hybrid decoding achieves five-task mean speedups of 2.2x on BitNet b1.58-2B and 2.1-2.4x on 1.7B-4B Bonsai models at comparable task quality. On RTX 3090 and Jetson Orin, it further achieves up to 2.0x in five-task mean throughput and 3.3x on MBPP+, respectively. These results demonstrate that BitMTP accelerates ultra-low-bit LLM generation across backbones, model sizes, and GPU types. The source code is released at this https URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28500
Long-term assistants must follow unfinished tasks across days as information and circumstances change. Finding information or starting an action, however, does not ensure that the task gets completed. We introduce OptionWorld, a benchmark that traces information acquisition, judgments, actions, and outcomes in simulated daily-life tasks to identify where current LLMs fall short as long-term personal assistants. In runs with archived decision inputs, the key facts remain in the model's last input before the deadline in 35.5% of failed instances. Failure analysis identifies the three most frequent problems: needed information is not obtained or combined, available opportunities to act go unused, and agents impose restrictions that the task does not require. Three follow-up experiments show that supplying missing facts restores task success in some cases; action reminders can restart work while subsequent steps still miss the deadline; and correcting a supplied note that wrongly forbids contact restores permitted inquiry. These findings locate shortcomings in maintaining task state: connecting facts to unfinished work, following through before deadlines, and separating actual restrictions from the agent's assumptions.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28491
Omni LLMs can naturally locate key audio and visual evidence and integrate information across modalities for audiovisual reasoning. Existing audio-visual reasoning benchmarks that mainly rely on multiple-choice questions usually score models solely based on answer correctness, making it difficult to assess whether a model truly forms a reasoning chain from evidence to the correct answer. In addition, textual or unimodal shortcuts may allow models to answer correctly without analyzing the necessary audio-visual evidence, further weakening the reliability of evaluation benchmarks. To address these issues, we introduce EvaOmni, an evidence-grounded benchmark containing 392 videos and 1,027 purely human-annotated question-answer pairs, covering 15 capabilities and three levels: retrieval and localization, basic understanding, and complex reasoning. We design a series of rigorous annotation procedures in which experts annotate audio and visual evidence and construct video-based distractors; humans review whether questions meet strict inspection criteria, and finally models filter textual and unimodal shortcuts. Beyond high-quality question-answer pairs, we require models to simultaneously return the answer and supporting evidence intervals in order to evaluate the complete reasoning chain. We propose the Coverage Grounded Score (C.G.) to measure how much annotated evidence a model identifies, and the Bottleneck Grounded Score (B.G.) to penalize poor temporal localization in either modality; both are incorporated into answer correctness. Across 7 open-weight and 17 proprietary Omni LLMs, Gemini3.7-Flash achieved the highest overall accuracy (79.4%), C.G. (70.8%), and B.G. (35.1%). At Level 3, it reached 79.1% accuracy, but its B.G. was only 12.3%. These results show that even the most advanced models still have room for development in grounded audio-visual reasoning.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28444