https://arxiv.org/api/GvzvacTJUl/ERwu4O+785AkPp5w 2026-11-12T03:27:35Z 125187 0 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.09928v2 2026-11-10T18:59:47Z

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) exhibit strong visual understanding, yet the internal features that cause these behaviors remain difficult to identify, audit, or control. While applicable to post-hoc inspection, hidden states that are decomposed into interpretable feature directions using sparse autoencoders (SAEs) neither readily isolate which features are changed by multimodal training, nor are they directly useful for targeted control. We introduce MMDiff, a multimodal model-diffing framework that trains multimodal SAEs and turns them into feature-level interfaces for discovering and controlling multimodal behavior. MMDiff supports three uses: (i) feature isolation, by diffing a base-LM SAE against its multimodal-adapted counterpart to identify features altered by multimodal training; (ii) task-specific feature detection, via per-token contrastive firing analysis that isolates causal features; and (iii) feature-level control, by causally removing or steering the discovered feature directions. We train multimodal SAEs for three MLLM families, LLaVA-MORE, PaliGemma 2, and InternVL3.5, and evaluate on visual-spatial understanding, multimodal safety, and OCR. MMDiff discovers sparse, causally specific features whose removal selectively degrades target behaviors by an average of 12% on spatial tasks and 17% on OCR, and reduces attack success rate by 24% on multimodal safety attacks, with no impact on VQA performance. Steering these features improves spatial and OCR accuracy by +3.6% and +1.8% on average over a standard single-layer steering baseline. These results show that multimodal SAEs can serve not only as interpretability tools, but as mechanisms for auditing, steering, and controlling MLLMs behavior toward safer and more capable generations.

2026-08-10T17:59:30Z Accepted at the 40th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2026) Hunar Batra Lachin Naghashyar Ashkan Khakzar Philip Torr Christian Schroeder de Witt Constantin Venhoff Ronald Clark http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14515v1 2026-11-10T18:58:46Z

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.

2026-11-10T18:58:46Z Zijian Zhang Rizhen Hu Jiangweizhi Peng Shiyang Li Sujay Bhatt Sihan Zeng Mingyi Hong http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14514v1 2026-11-10T18:58:43Z

LLM agents are increasingly used for open-ended, data-driven scientific discovery, yet most of them evaluate hypotheses pointwise, testing an empirical claim $h$ only against its complement $\neg h$. When evidence rejects $h$, the agent learns that one explanation is unlikely but not which alternative the evidence supports. To recover that alternative, we introduce Contrastive Discovery, which replaces the single hypothesis with a contrast set, a scientific question paired with mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive competing explanations. Each experiment is scored by how its evidence redistributes belief across the set, and the question is resolved when belief concentrates on one explanation. Because contrast sets change only the unit an agent proposes and scores, an existing agent can use them to re-evaluate evidence it has already collected or to guide its search. Across six domains, $89\%$ of the pointwise candidates with the largest belief shifts are rejections. On the same evidence, contrast sets resolve $73\%$ of these candidates to a specific alternative. When contrast sets guide search, the agent resolves $67\%$ more questions than pointwise surprisal under the same experiment budget. In a blinded study, $38$ human experts chose the same explanation on $78\%$ of resolved questions and on $82\%$ of questions where the pointwise agent rejected its hypothesis and stopped. Together, these results support explicit competing explanations as a way for discovery agents to resolve more scientific questions from the same evidence and validation budget.

2026-11-10T18:58:43Z Accepted at NeurIPS 2026. 55 pages. Project page: https://codiscovery.ai/contrastive-discovery/ Ziang Liu James J. Kim Yijia Dai Jennifer J. Sun http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14493v1 2026-11-10T18:50:06Z

Deploying LLM-based analytics agents in enterprise settings requires evaluation frameworks that can reliably detect failures across complex, multi-tool workflows. We present a three-phase comparative study of three evaluation frameworks, each representing a distinct evaluation paradigm (trace-based LLM judging, text-only LLM judging with red-teaming, and deterministic heuristics), applied to two analytics agents in a controlled research setting using frozen execution traces. Phase 1 quantifies evaluation harness stability through repeated measurements, finding that 97% of configurations meet the stability threshold and that stability patterns are agent-independent. Phase 2 measures known risk detection on 72 ground-truth test cases, where the trace-based framework achieves the best precision-recall balance (F1=0.90) while text-only evaluation matches on recall but generates 5x more false alarms. Phase 3 evaluates unknown risk discovery, uncovering 24 novel failures with zero overlap between functional testing and security red-teaming. Our results demonstrate that (1) the information available to the evaluation harness determines evaluation quality, (2) functional and security evaluation are complementary, and (3) LLM-based evaluation harnesses surface subtle errors that human reviewers miss. We recommend a two-framework strategy: trace-based evaluation for functional assessment and adversarial red-teaming for security validation.

2026-11-10T18:50:06Z Accepted to KDD 2026, Jeju, Korea. 9 pages, 3 figures Howard Zhang Chuck Arvin Logan Brown Mihir Bhatia Neelu Choudhary Lily Miao http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14483v1 2026-11-10T18:45:07Z

Neural networks are increasingly studied not merely as predictive systems, but as complex systems whose internal computations are themselves objects of scientific inquiry. Recent progress in mechanistic interpretability (MI) has made it possible to identify neurons, features, circuits, population structures, and dynamical patterns associated with model behavior. As these tools improve, attention is shifting from what can be observed inside a model to how those observations support mechanistic explanations. We examine the parallel efforts of neuroscience and MI to address this question and identify recurring inferential bottlenecks when inferring mechanisms from complex neural systems. We propose five principles and organize them into a recursive logic for a more rigorous procedure of mechanistic inference. These principles provide a framework that supports scientific discovery in two senses: it helps turn local interpretability findings into cumulative knowledge of mechanisms within models, and it makes those mechanisms sufficiently precise to generate testable hypotheses about domains beyond the models. Evidence beyond MI is ultimately required to establish what model mechanisms reveal about the world.

2026-11-10T18:45:07Z NeurIPS 2026 Interp4Discovery (Oral) Zhimin Hu Chen Jiang Hanbo Xie N. Apurva Ratan Murty Sashank Varma http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14480v1 2026-11-10T18:41:37Z

In this paper, we present 1020 Group's submission to the WMT26 shared task on automated quality evaluation. Our system, Pterodactyl, was engineered specifically for subtasks 2 and 3, that is, segment-level quality score prediction and the detection of error-free segments. Pterodactyl is a highly customizable, ultra-low cost system optimized for binary classification in translation triage and data curation. It is based on an LLM-as-a-judge approach, with prompt engineering and model selection guided by ROC analysis. We also developed several variants of Pterodactyl that were specifically adapted for subtasks 3.

2026-11-10T18:41:37Z 6 pages, 4 figures Proceedings of the Eleventh Conference on Machine Translation (WMT 2026), pp. 1638-1643, 2026 Evelyn Y. Garland Carola F. Berger 10.18653/2026.wmt-main.96 http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14477v1 2026-11-10T18:39:49Z

Text-to-SQL systems over large pooled catalogs must first retrieve the tables a question needs. We compare against the published table recall of RASL, which uses Claude 3.5 models to extract keywords and select tables, on pooled BIRD, Spider, and Fiben catalogs. FERN (Feature-Engineered Ranking with No generative LLM) instead fuses three frozen retrievers into 100 candidates, describes each with up to 120 features, and reorders them with LightGBM rankers fitted once on BIRD's training questions. On Spider, where it was not fitted, its candidate pool alone reaches RASL's published recall at fifteen tables (98.0), and the ranker raises the share of questions with every gold table in the top five (complete@5) from 83.9% to 95.6%. At five tables, FERN's recall is within one point of RASL's on Spider (96.7 vs 97.0) and on BIRD with its evidence hints (96.6 vs 97.5), and 8.2 points below on BIRD without them (89.3). On 121 real BEAVER questions, without BEAVER fitting, its recall at fifteen (82.1) falls between two BEAVER-trained retrievers (80.8, 84.5), but its complete@15 is below both (49.6 vs 54.5 and 62.0). On Fiben, it falls far short at fifteen tables (54.2 vs 69.2, different question sets), although its recall at fifty is numerically close to RASL's question-only retrieval result (80.7 vs 79.4). On BIRD dev with evidence, non-retrieval features raise complete@5 by 7.7 points over retrieval signals alone. On BIRD dev, median latency is 208 ms per question on one A100, without hosted model calls.

2026-11-10T18:39:49Z 19 pages Arjun Rao Nishant Gopinath http://arxiv.org/abs/2610.11790v2 2026-11-10T18:31:15Z

Byte-level language models such as the Byte Latent Transformer (BLT) group bytes into patches and run their large global model once per patch. BLT starts a patch where a small model's next-byte entropy is high. We show that under tight patch budgets this rule has a blind spot: positions whose type the preceding text fixes but whose value must be computed, such as the number after "= " in a worked math solution. A nearly certain digit keeps the next byte's entropy near or below log2(10) = 3.32 bits, about BLT-1B's threshold for a 10% budget. In Meta's BLT-1B with patch starts on 10% of bytes, the entropy rule puts a patch start at 16% of the computed results in GSM8K solutions and gets 19.0% of them exactly right given the true preceding text; a boundary after each "=" at the same patch count gets 51.8%, and entropy combined with a label-free boundary-dependence signal gets 67.1% (default layout at 26% of bytes: 76.8%). The gap survives adapting BLT-1B to the budget with low-rank adapters (32.9% vs 72.7%, three runs per rule). In byte models trained from scratch at a 10% budget on a 1.9 GB math corpus, it is not detectable at 1M parameters, appears on final answers at 12M and on both targets at 50M, as training data grow too: at 50M boundary dependence gets 35.9% of computed results against 13.9% for entropy and 78.9% of final answers against 59.0% (3 seeds each), although final answers mostly copy the solution's last number and entropy starts a patch at every one. In BLT-1B the blind spot narrows at larger budgets (entropy covers about 90% of the values right after "= " at 20% of bytes) and in the same solutions rewritten as prose, where a patch start at each value still pays. Boundary dependence, the change in the model's own loss when a patch start is removed or added, measured per two-byte context on text in the same format, finds these positions without labels.

2026-10-08T12:03:45Z 15 pages, 4 figures, 6 tables. v2: blind spot scoped to type-fixing cues and, in BLT-1B, to tight patch budgets (new Section 5); final answers shown to be mostly copies under teacher forcing; gap no longer said to grow with model size; seed-level intervals and a second training recipe. Code, logs and results: https://github.com/nicoveraz/segresearch (release v2.1.0, doi:10.5281/zenodo.24023934) Nicolás Vera Zúñiga http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14459v1 2026-11-10T18:27:26Z

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.

2026-11-10T18:27:26Z Eugene Jang Catherine Arnett Terra Blevins http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14421v1 2026-11-10T17:59:28Z

Streaming speech recognizers output a word only after the speaker has finished it, typically 90-400 ms later. For a voice agent every millisecond counts: the sooner the words are outputted, the sooner the agent can start a search or plan its reply. We present Earlybird, a 29M-parameter streaming recognizer (16.8 MB at 4 bits). Earlybird learns from audio cut off at random points, including partway through a word, and is asked to predict every word that is due by then in full, plus a guess of the next two words. Its raw token probabilities give a confidence for every word including the one still being spoken. On clean audiobook speech (LibriSpeech test-clean), the median word is predicted correctly 90 ms before the speaker finishes it, while released streaming models get it 90 to 400 ms after it ends. Earlybird is the earliest on all six test sets we time, covering audiobooks, TED talks, public speech, earnings calls, and synthetic speech. On the same audiobooks, 69% of words are predicted correctly before they end, against 3-25% for the other models. For words still being spoken, confidence is calibrated, with an expected calibration error (ECE) of 3.7 to 5.5. On the eight English Open ASR Leaderboard sets, it is more accurate than Moonshine Tiny on every set and roughly ties Whistle, a model of the same size.

2026-11-10T17:59:28Z 9 pages, 3 figures, 6 tables. Model: https://huggingface.co/sahilmahendrakar/Earlybird-29M Sahil Mahendrakar http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14413v1 2026-11-10T17:53:44Z

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.

2026-11-10T17:53:44Z 25 pages, 15 figures, 9 tables Mohammed Nayeem Khan Logesh L Aliyas Ahmad Misri http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14399v1 2026-11-10T17:45:12Z

Speculative decoding accelerates LLM inference by having a draft model propose multiple tokens for the target model to verify in one pass. The speedup is governed by the expected acceptance length (EAL), yet standard training objectives such as cross-entropy, KL divergence, and total variation focus only on distribution matching or single-step overlap. Recent studies instead propose block-level training objectives, aiming to optimize EAL directly. However, these objectives remain surrogates rather than exact formulations of EAL. For example, some average later acceptance over target-distributed continuations rather than the verification branches selected by accepted tokens, introducing a covariance gap that can reverse the gradient direction. We analyze this gap and derive REAL, a real EAL training loss that uses path weights for unbiased estimation and Rao-Blackwellization for variance reduction. In a controlled loss-level comparison with a Qwen3.6-35B-A3B target and a Domino drafter, REAL outperforms WTV, VSD, DBLast, and the static LK baseline on probabilistic serving acceptance length across 9 task subsets and 5 evaluation seeds. These gains require only a change to the training loss, with no modification to the drafter architecture or inference procedure, demonstrating the practicality of real EAL training. A reference implementation of the REAL loss is available at https://github.com/King-ty/speculators/tree/real-loss.

2026-11-10T17:45:12Z 19 pages, 10 figures Yu Tian http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.15893v3 2026-11-10T17:43:32Z

Hallucinations remain a major obstacle to deploying large language models (LLMs) in knowledge-intensive settings, where generated responses must be faithfully grounded in provided evidence. Reinforcement learning (RL) is a promising direction for hallucination mitigation, but response-level faithfulness rewards suffer from a granularity mismatch: localized hallucinations can cause supported content to receive spurious penalties. Although recent work introduces fine-grained feedback such as claim-level verification and token-level rewards, unbalanced credit assignment can still induce length, verbosity, or optimization-noise biases. We propose BALTO, a Balanced Token-level Policy Optimization framework for hallucination mitigation. BALTO extracts checkable factual claims, verifies them against the reference context, and projects claim-level judgments to token-level labels. A balanced token-level credit assignment mechanism is introduced into the framework. This design redistributes probability mass from unsupported content toward faithful content, rather than suppressing the entire response. We systematically analyze the limitations of response-level rewards from a theoretical standpoint, and prove BALTO's advantages in training stability and optimization efficiency for hallucination mitigation. Experiments on ConFiQA, RAGTruth, and FinLLM-Eval show that BALTO achieves the highest faithfulness across all six model--benchmark settings and consistently outperforms existing post-training baselines in Q-Score, demonstrating a stronger faithfulness--informativeness trade-off. The code is released at https://github.com/NingLi670/BALTO.

2026-06-14T16:25:59Z Ning Li Zixuan Guo Yan Xu Wenbo Fei Yifan Niu Chang Luo Yasheng Wang Weiwen Liu Yong Yu Weinan Zhang http://arxiv.org/abs/2611.14387v1 2026-11-10T17:40:24Z

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.

2026-11-10T17:40:24Z Amir Mann Jonathan Fhima Shaked Brody Or Avitan Asif Zamir Shahar Tsiper Niv Nayman http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.08243v2 2026-11-10T17:34:17Z

When a model behaves in unexpected ways, we want to know why, but its intent cannot be observed directly, and its self-reports may be rationalizations. We introduce comparative motivation profiles, which treat intent as propensity: we edit the model's beliefs about facts that a hypothesized motivation would depend on and measure how its behavior changes. To keep artifacts of the editing method from driving the result, we edit two minimally different hypotheses in the same way, with matched amplify and suppress edits; we call this symmetric belief editing. We apply it to alignment faking in four open-weight model organisms, contrasting scheming, which tracks the training consequences of compliance, with performative misalignment, which tracks what researchers expect to observe, and edit beliefs with synthetic document fine-tuning (SDF), activation steering, and prompting. Under SDF, amplifying performative beliefs raises alignment faking on every model, while scheming edits move it less or shift compliance in the monitored and unmonitored conditions alike. Steering on model organisms changes compliance along the expectation-tracking direction but mainly the reasoning along the consequence-tracking direction, and prompting agrees. In these organisms, alignment faking follows what the models infer their evaluators expect, which puts it closer to sycophancy than to deceptive alignment.

2026-06-06T16:01:52Z Accepted at NeurIPS 2026. 35 pages, 16 figures David Vella Zarb Rustem Turtayev Taywon Min Jinghua Ou Shi Feng