An LLM multi-agent system (MAS) is only as good as the agents it chooses to trust: its accuracy and cost hinge on its topology, meaning which agents are included and how they communicate. A single task score, however, does not reveal which agents help or hinder performance. We propose Contrastive Attribution Topology Search (CATS), which searches for compact teams within a fixed supergraph of specialized agents. An LLM attributer compares execution traces across candidate topologies and assigns credit to individual agents. CATS uses these credits to update supergraph edges while progressively pruning weak edges and agents, yielding a small team for deployment. With small open-weight models and matched candidate evaluations, CATS improves mean accuracy on BigCodeBench by 5.3 percentage points over score-only heuristic search while using 54\% fewer deployment tokens. On MBPP, CATS matches the strongest baselines with fewer tokens than the other searches. In a HotpotQA prompt-poisoning stress test, CATS excludes all adversarially prompted agents in all three runs, whereas random search retains some at comparable accuracy. Per-agent credit thus supports both team optimization and the pruning of potentially harmful agents.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29292
Large audio-language models (LALMs) understand music, yet struggle to locate a described moment in time. We ask whether this reflects missing temporal information or a bottleneck in how the time span is extracted. Using a paired-query probe built from Slakh2100 stem activations, we attach a state query (e.g., ``only piano and bass are playing'') and a change query (e.g., ``the guitar drops out, leaving piano and bass'') to the same span and vary how much preceding audio the model is shown. Across frozen LALMs, three ways of extracting the span ask different questions: full-track prompting asking whether the model can say when; windowed yes/no scoring asking whether it verifies the moment when handed the segment, and whether it needs what came before; attention asking whether it can find the moment on its own. State queries score above baseline without context, while change queries improve with preceding context in most short-segment models; 30s padded encoders show no comparable recovery. Prompting and attention expose almost none of this. Prompting failures thus understate what LALMs can verify, though not what they can locate, by an amount set by query type and encoder.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29256
Masked diffusion language models have emerged as an alternative to autoregressive models, enabling parallel token generation. However, standard masked diffusion language models use a shared noise schedule across positions without explicitly encoding which positions should be resolved first. Many tasks exhibit a natural priority among positions: document titles and section headings can guide the generation of body text, while Sudoku cells determined directly from the initial clues can help resolve more difficult cells. To incorporate this notion of priority (or hierarchy) among token positions, we introduce the Hierarchical Masked Diffusion Language Model (HMDLM), which augments each token position with a hierarchy level available as part of the training data, and requires zero or minimal additional annotations. It factors generation into two passes: the first predicts a hierarchy distribution over masked positions, the second predicts token distributions conditioned on it. Giving each hierarchy level its own noise schedule induces a soft, controllable preference for revealing higher-priority positions earlier while keeping decoding fully parallel. Our formulation is mathematically grounded, and we re-derive the forward and reverse processes and the NELBO for this factorization. Our evaluation shows that for the task of language generation on LM1B, HMDLM reduces perplexity by more than 1.5 points over Anchored Diffusion Language Model (ADLM), a recently proposed strong diffusion baseline; on WikiHow, we see a drop in perplexity of up to 4.4 pts on ADLM and up to 7 pts against MDLM. An LLM judge on WikiHow prefers HMDLM generations (the two variants combined) more than $2\times$ as often as the baseline. On the task of solving Sudoku puzzles requiring multi-step reasoning, it improves solution accuracy by up to $8.6\%$ absolute points over existing diffusion baselines.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29255
People share and understand others' experiences differently based on their social identities; often, people empathize more when the other person belongs to their ingroup compared to an outgroup. While this intergroup empathy gap is well-studied in social psychology, it remains unclear how it manifests in naturally occurring online social interactions. To this end, we measure how commenters express social judgments, as an indirect outcome of their understanding towards the posters, and empathy in text, based on whether commenters share the poster's gender or are of similar ages. We focus on posts where the poster self-reports these demographics, and analyze 126,716 comments associated with 36,163 posts from 18,111 commenters in r/AmItheAsshole, while controlling for commenter and poster group identities, post features (topic, length, and score), and both commenter- and post-level variance. Our results show that when commenters and posters are ingroup, in either gender or age, commenters are more likely to provide a Not the Asshole verdict and show greater text-based understanding as measured by LLMs. We also observe that older commenters behave differently from younger ones. Furthermore, in a subset of posts where the gender and age of the other party in the conflict are explicitly mentioned, we find that commenter-poster ingroup effects are moderated by the group relationships between the poster and the other party when commenters make social judgments. Our work highlights the importance of intergroup context and social group nuances in understanding online discourse.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29254
Agentic search depends on the interface through which a language-model agent accesses and explores a corpus. Existing interface designs are fixed by hand and applied unchanged to every corpus, although effective designs may depend on the corpus. We introduce SearchWeaver, a framework for automatic search interface optimization guided by downstream search performance. A proposer uses execution trajectories and task rewards to jointly revise corpus artifacts, executable tools, and usage instructions. This pro cess optimizes what information is prepared in advance, which operations tools perform, and which decisions remain with the search agent. With GPT-5.4-nano, the optimized interfaces improve answer accuracy from 71.6% to 78.4% on BrowseComp-Plus and average nDCG@10 from 45.7 to 55.0 across four BRIGHT subsets over Direct Corpus Interaction. These findings highlight the value of jointly optimizing corpus artifacts, executable tools, and usage instructions to develop effective search interfaces.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29250
Omni-modal assistants must remember not only what users say, but also what they show and convey. Existing long-term memory benchmarks are mostly text-and-image or report a single end-to-end score, so they cannot locate whether evidence is lost when it is represented, retrieved, delivered, or read. We introduce MOSAIC, a benchmark of 923 questions over persona-grounded histories of 11-24 sessions spanning text, image, video, and audio. MOSAIC constructs targeted spatial, temporal, and prosodic signals rather than decorative media, with the strongest causal validation for spatial information and selector-level validation for annotated prosody, and pairs them with a matched diagnostic protocol that freezes the question, reader, prompt, and budget while intervening on representation, retrieval, and delivery. Matched decomposition shows that representation loss is modality-dependent, residual reading dominates even under gold evidence, and abstention remains weak on these controls: strong answerable scores coexist with failures to refuse. MOSAIC thus turns omni-modal memory evaluation from a leaderboard into a diagnosis of write, retrieve, deliver, and read failures.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29249
Current LLM safety benchmarks predominantly rely on binary safe or unsafe labels, lacking explanatory depth and suffering from low consistency across automated judges. To address this, we introduce DiagSafe, a diagnostic evaluation framework that moves beyond binary classification by employing prompt-level rubrics. Grounded in globally applicable AI safety policies, each rubric provides explicit criteria along two dimensions: safety, which targets concrete harms with specific exemptions to suppress false positives, and usefulness, which independently evaluates instruction fulfillment. To ensure a robust and realistic evaluation, we construct a bilingual (English-Chinese) benchmark grounded in a comprehensive 84-label safety taxonomy, consisting of two subsets: DiagBase, which covers single- and multi-turn prompts with direct harmful queries and template-based jailbreaks, and DiagAttack, which embeds harmful intents into complex instruction-following tasks to form challenging instruction attacks. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DiagSafe significantly enhances the reliability of LLM-as-a-judge evaluation, achieving 95.34% agreement with human annotations -- substantially higher than the 69%-87% achieved by the baselines -- and high inter-judge consistency (Cohen's $\kappa$ = 0.864). Furthermore, applying our framework reveals that leading LLMs differ markedly in their unsafe rates, and each model also exhibits unique vulnerabilities along different dimensions. In addition, we observe that models are particularly susceptible in Chinese and multi-turn contexts. Ultimately, DiagSafe provides a reliable and explainable tool for auditing and optimizing LLM alignment.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29225
Retrieval-augmented generation can expose unwanted concepts through retrieved evidence even when the generator is moderated. We study query-side concept suppression with a fixed encoder and document index. Compositional Concept Unlearning (C$^2$U) routes a profile-derived direction through an augmented atom bank, adding only a bounded edited-minus-original delta to the raw query. Across five datasets, four encoders, and three seeds, the validation-selected configuration reduces pooled binary target Hit@5 by 4.25 percentage points with non-positive control degradation and target-exposure changes. Under the evaluated query transforms, it suppresses target density without increasing budgeted control-query exposure. Separately, ArXiv four-concept composition improves over an averaged-direction comparator after independent validation gates and first-use test evaluation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29223
Personalized shopping benchmarks ask which item fits the user; we ask how far an agent may commit on that item, and pose learning the individual's auto-purchase line as a task. The boundary is evidence-conditioned and three-valued: whether committing is appropriate depends on the sufficiency of product information (warrant), reversibility, price against the user's norm, and urgency, not only on fit; and the natural output is don't buy, confirm first, or buy automatically. Across sixteen instruction-tuned models, autonomous commitment is misaligned with a human authorization reference in which fifteen annotators, role-playing the delegating principal from a given profile, choose the furthest action they would allow without confirmation: models commit even when fit is low and when their own evidence flag reports the warrant missing. This is overreach. The line is individual: these raters disagree, yet the disagreement is structured and partly predictable from a person's own other labels. A shallow learner on a few dozen of a person's own labels predicts their held-out auto-purchase line at a median of 0.79 by 30-40 labels, outperforming every evaluated prompt$\times$model configuration, including a per-annotator oracle over 80 configurations; the learned boundary does not transfer across domains. We release the counterfactual benchmark, human authorization reference, and annotation protocol after acceptance.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29216
Speculative decoding uses a target model to verify a tree of draft tokens in parallel. We study whether the resulting next-token distributions can help select the next tree. For unrestricted target models, we show that guaranteed exact reuse requires a distribution computed at the next round's complete context. We characterize when retaining this distribution requires sacrificing accepted tokens and establish conditions under which this loss persists across decoding rounds. Across six targets, we find that reranking first-token branches with a separately computed distribution at the current context improves expected acceptance over draft ranking, especially with small tree budgets. Drawing the first token from this distribution before allocating the tree further improves expected acceptance over pruning a preselected tree, even at equal mean tree size. In our experiments, both selection rules also decode faster than draft ranking when the separate target pass overlaps standalone drafting. Our findings show that making target probabilities available before tree allocation can improve the efficiency of speculative decoding. Our code is available at this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29210
Diffusion Language Models(DLMs) provide a promising alternative to autoregressive language models through iterative denoising and bidirectional generation. However, their iterative generation process introduces distinct safety vulnerabilities because harmful content can emerge at arbitrary positions and persist across subsequent denoising steps. Existing defenses rely on fixed interventions or aggressive remasking, which limits adaptive control over denoising trajectories and can degrade generation quality. We propose an inference-time defense framework that combines adaptive safety steering with safety-aware remasking. Our method uses a gating direction to continuously adjust steering strength from the current denoising state and applies a steering direction to masked positions to guide subsequent predictions toward safer trajectories. Our method further employs a lightweight response detector after the first generation block to identify unsafe trajectories at an early stage. The detector triggers targeted remasking over generated content and part of the conditioning prompt, and the model regenerates the selected positions under adaptive safety steering. This design combines continuous trajectory control with explicit correction of unsafe content while requiring no modification of model parameters. Experiments on LLaDA and Dream demonstrate that our method improves robustness against diverse jailbreak attacks while preserving benign generation quality and general model capability. Our code is available at this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.13043
norregel asks language models for numeric values in Norwegian statutes, regulations and parliamentary decisions (NOK amounts, percentages, multiples of the National Insurance basic amount (G) and age limits), each at a stated date. The 916 items were extracted mechanically from Lovdata's open data, and each carries the dated history of its provision, so an answer can be classed as correct, outdated, wrong or uninterpretable. We report a first and a second preregistered run on the same items. In the first run (five models, listed publicly only after local analysis), H1, that outdated answers are more frequent for values that took effect after a model's cutoff, could not be tested in substance, and H2 and H3 were inconclusive; Opus 5.5 and Sonnet 4.6 answered 46.7% and 40.2% of the 880 primary items correctly. The second run was preregistered and published before any of its calls, and eight models were analysed. Its pooled primary test supported H1 under the preregistered decision rule (d = 17.8 percentage points, 95% interval [7.7, 28.9], p = 0.0001). In the preregistered sensitivity analysis S8, which counts as outdated only the most recent value that differs from the key, d was 3.9 [-3.6, 12.7] (p = 0.1754), an interval that contains 0. H1 was supported in every other preregistered sensitivity analysis, but S8 is the only one that gives both groups one target value, so we do not regard the support for H1 as robust. The share of outdated answers equal to that most recent value (H2) was 56.1% [46.6, 65.0], an interval that contains 0.5, and the pooled test of a lower share correct in Nynorsk than in Bokmål (H3) was inconclusive. Several models, among them Haiku 4.5, gave mostly uninterpretable answers. Items and keys are withheld; item IDs, per-answer classes, code and results are on Zenodo.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29207
Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive emergent reasoning capabilities, yet they remain constrained by fixed model parameters and finite context windows. Even when augmented with static retrieval, they can produce statements that are unsupported by, or even contradictory to, retrieved evidence. This leads to hallucinations, difficulty incorporating up-to-date information, and failures to correctly interpret or reconcile sources. Recent work addresses these limitations by tightly coupling step-by-step reasoning with interactive search, treating retrieval as an action within an iterative agentic loop rather than a one-shot preprocessing step. This study reviews frameworks that implement such reasoning-search loops by interleaving planning, querying, retrieval, integration, verification, and stopping. We analyze these systems through four architectural axes: retrieval coupling, controller design, knowledge source, and grounding strictness. We separately treat the learning signal as a cross-cutting dimension because prompting, supervision, preference optimization, and reinforcement learning can instantiate the same architecture while producing materially different search, stopping, and grounding behavior. We further distinguish benchmark difficulty from RSA-loop demand and synthesize controlled within-study ablations and quality-cost deltas, avoiding invalid pooling across heterogeneous model backbones, retrievers, corpora, and evaluation protocols. Our goal is to clarify the landscape of reasoning-search-augmented LLMs and outline a unified perspective on the design choices shaping future research.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29189
Tables in real-world documents, including scientific papers, financial reports, and statistical summaries, frequently use merged cells, multi-level headers, and sectioned layouts. Yet the lightweight formats LLMs handle best (Markdown, CSV) cannot express these structures, while expressive formats (HTML, LaTeX) impose excessive token cost and parsing complexity. To enable systematic analysis of this trade-off, we introduce a taxonomy decomposing table structure into six atomic features (F1-F6) and corresponding complexity levels (L1-L6), and construct STB (Synthetic Table Benchmark), a controlled benchmark with 1,089 tables systematically distributed across complexity levels. Using this framework, we propose LTEM (LLM-friendly Table-Enhanced Markdown), a formally specified, minimal extension of Markdown that explicitly encodes spans and hierarchical headers. Experiments across five state-of-the-art LLMs show that LTEM achieves accuracy comparable to HTML, offers a favorable accuracy-token trade-off relative to HTML and LaTeX, and produces substantially fewer invalid responses than LaTeX; for table generation, LTEM is comparable to MultiMarkdown though HTML is best. We release our taxonomy, benchmark, and format specification to support future research on LLM-table interaction.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29188
We study how to improve training efficiency on Ascend NPUs. In the NPU training programs we study, framework-level compilation optimizations such as operator fusion are only partially applied, leaving fragmented computation and avoidable execution overheads. Profiling-guided tuning can address these inefficiencies, but it often requires costly trial and error. To make training on NPUs more efficient, we propose TrainBridge, an agentic approach for transferring GPU optimization guidance to NPU training. TrainBridge uses the highly optimized execution produced by mature GPU compilation stacks as a task-specific reference for NPU tuning. It extracts optimization intents from the GPU training execution to guide NPU program rewrites and further refines the rewritten program through iterative profiling. Our GPU-to-NPU migration experiments show that TrainBridge achieves an average 1.7x speedup across four workloads covering LLM pretraining, image classification, and vision-language training, and an average speedup of nearly 2.0x across 27 Modded-NanoGPT speedrun records with highly optimized GPU implementations.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29171
On-policy self-distillation (OPSD) enables a language model to learn from a Teacher instantiated from the same model but given access to privileged information, such as a reference solution. We find that access to sufficient privileged information allows the Teacher to generate highly accurate trajectories; however, accuracy alone does not guarantee that these trajectories are suitable for Student learning. Direct access to a complete solution may encourage shortened, reference-conditioned derivations that omit the exploration, verification, and self-correction required to solve problems without privileged information. We introduce TeachBack, a bidirectional preference-learning framework for on-policy self-distillation that learns not only from the Teacher but also how the Teacher should teach. TeachBack shapes the Teacher's generation behavior by controlling the length of the reference-reasoning suffix injected into the prompt and by varying the prompt style. While maintaining comparable Teacher accuracy, it encourages the Teacher to explore and re-solve problems, thereby reducing its reliance on the reference solution. At each rollout refresh, the shared policy generates both a privileged Teacher trajectory and a problem-only Student trajectory. A pairwise preference objective uses privileged Teacher trajectories to improve Student learning, while the reversed preference uses the Student's behavior to shape future Teacher supervision under the privileged condition. Experiments on mathematical and logical reasoning tasks show that TeachBack consistently improves Student performance over existing OPSD methods and related baselines.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29167
There is a widespread sense that AI-generated text has recently become harder to understand. In this study, we investigate a set of psycholinguistic features that are known to correlate with human processing difficulty (e.g., object relative clauses, long syntactic dependencies, low-frequency n-grams). Using a novel corpus of AI-generated text across diverse domains, we find that AI models use these difficult features more often than paraphrases generated by round-trip translation. Compared with human writing, all nine frontier and near-frontier models use more inanimate subjects with animate verbs and more low-frequency n-grams, and most also use longer dependencies, more stacked nouns, and more reduced object relatives in conversation; we also demonstrate substantial variation across model families. We propose and test a hypothesis as to why: while human language is optimized for successful communication, AI-generated text is increasingly optimized for other goals like math, code, and reasoning, in which there is a pressure for \textit{information density} rather than successful communication. We provide a proof-of-concept for this hypothesis by fine-tuning a language model under a length penalty, which leads to a divergence from human-like linguistic behavior. Our findings highlight the axes of misalignment between linguistic processing demands in humans and LLMs, and point toward possible remedies.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29162
Context: Reviewing a pull request requires verification evidence that addresses the proposed change. Coding agent benchmarks and studies of pull request outcomes do not directly assess this relationship. Objective: We test whether the V-Model's build and verify pairs can measure verification evidence in pull requests and support comparisons between agent-authored and human-authored changes. Method: VeeReview classifies four build and verify pairs using repository signals and a language-model judge. Three pairs use model judgements constrained by deterministic signals, and a rule over the diff and repository tree decides Module Design-Unit Test. We evaluated VeeReview against a 25-pull request reference set labelled by two raters and applied it to 1,454 matched pairs of agent and human pull requests from 741 repositories. Results: VeeReview assigned lower build-only rates to agent-authored pull requests on all four pairs, contrary to the preregistered hypothesis (mixed-effects odds ratios 0.52 to 0.86). Architecture-Integration was not significant. Standardization for linked issues, shipped tests and size reduced matched-rate differences by 34% to 60%, and the rule-decided pair's standardized interval included zero. The instrument did not meet its preregistered calibration criterion: agreement with adjudicated labels was 4% to 60% against a required 80%, and inter-rater agreement was weak (kappa = 0.154). Conclusions: The rule-decided pair shows that a process measure judged by a language model partly reflects how a pull request is presented rather than the verification work behind it. We report the cohort differences as observations made with this instrument, and we argue that such measures need a mechanically decided component and a validated human reference before they can support comparisons of verification practice.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29143
Continuous diffusion language models generate a whole sequence in parallel, never drawing a single word at any intermediate step; only the final step turns embeddings into text. Models such as ELF now report autoregressive-level quality at a fraction of the sampling steps of discrete-token diffusion models, and this design principle -- no step-wise discretization -- is what their own ablations credit for the gain. We show that this same principle carries a hidden cost: a collapse of the lexical long tail. Measured against held-out human text, ELF's output matches the human rate on common words almost exactly, yet its rarest words appear at only 0.30x the human rate, a gap that does not close from 105M to 652M parameters and that no sampler setting these models expose can reach. A same-size GPT-2, in contrast, spans zero to above the human rate by its decoding rule alone. We trace the difference to what continuous diffusion models lack: with no step that ever draws a discrete word, every step is instead driven by an average over the candidates still in play, and averaging a rare candidate together with the common word competing for its slot lands on the common word. An autoregressive model avoids this because its decoding rule samples one candidate rather than averaging over all of them. We propose GRAFT, a training-free method that grafts this missing choice back onto a frozen model: while the model is still undecided, GRAFT commits the rare words the average would otherwise discard, then regenerates the sequence from scratch with those commitments held in place. Across three ELF scales and on LangFlow, an independent continuous dLLM, GRAFT restores the rare-word share of generated text from 0.42-0.77x the human rate to 0.82-1.10x, a relative gain of 34-109%, and moves the entire word-frequency profile closer to human on every model tested, by 2.7x on ELF-B and 12x on LangFlow.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29136
Merging different models into a single model is highly desirable for multi-task deployment, particularly in regulated domains like healthcare. In such settings, models are often locally fine-tuned due to strict data privacy policies, necessitating that aggregation operates exclusively on the fine-tuned weights. Existing methods apply a uniform merge across all tasks, ignoring the geometric relationships among their learned subspaces. When task updates occupy misaligned subspaces, projecting them onto a shared low-rank basis discards task-relevant directions, a failure mode named \emph{subspace interference}. Through this study, we show that the per-task projection error of a merged model is governed by the principal-angle alignment between each task and the shared subspace, so that grouping geometrically compatible tasks provably reduces this error within each group. Motivated by this observation, we propose \textbf{Group-wise Rank-Aware Model Merging (GRAM)}, which uses the principal-angle geometry of task vectors to decide which tasks should be merged together and then performs a standard SVD-based merge within each coalition; the pipeline requires only the fine-tuned weights at merge time. With only one additional model ($\nK{=}2$), GRAM significantly mitigates subspace interference and consistently outperforms prior merging methods across language understanding (GLUE with Flan-T5), 8-task CLIP vision, and medical instruction tuning (Qwen2-7B-Instruct with four English/Chinese medical LoRAs).
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.29110