arXiv:2608. 06933v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Today, we improve models by training and evaluating them on problems at the frontier of their abilities.
arXiv:2608. 01522v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Teaching a language model a skill it has not mastered is obstructed by three recurring difficulties: training data is scarce, ground-truth reasoning traces are usually unavailable, and models often exhibit an apparent ceiling beyond which additional data yields no further improvement.
arXiv:2608.30035v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-evolving reasoning frameworks train a Challenger to generate questions exposing a Solver's weaknesses, creating adaptive curricula without human d...
arXiv:2608. 15445v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a reward is correct on every training example yet consistent with more than one goal, a model can acquire an unintended one, a failure known as goal misgeneralization.
TTSR (Test-Time Self-Reflection) is a framework that enables large language models to adapt during inference by alternating between a Student role that solves test questions and a Teacher role that analyzes failures and generates targeted variant questions. The method incorporates a weakness memory and a strategy note to guide exploration, reducing reliance on noisy pseudo-labels and inefficient rollouts. Experiments on mathematical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate consistent test-time improvements, strong cross-backbone generalization, and transfer to general-domain reasoning tasks.
arXiv:2609.38409v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent progress in large language model reasoning has been driven by benchmarks and reinforcement learning environments with automatically verifiable r...
arXiv:2602. 14307v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly saturate new benchmarks shortly after they are published, benchmarking itself is at a juncture: if frontier models keep improving, it will become increasingly hard for humans to generate discriminative tasks, provide accurate ground-truth answers, or evaluate complex solutions.
arXiv:2606. 26671v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-training alignment determines the reasoning and human preference following capabilities of large language models, yet most existing works withhold detailed data construction, filtering rules and training recipes, which hinders community reproducibility and lightweight model optimization.
arXiv:2606. 09052v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Self-evolution offers a scalable path to stronger reasoning: a pretrained language model improves itself with only minimal external supervision.
arXiv:2602. 09924v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Running LLMs with extended reasoning on every problem is expensive, but determining which inputs actually require additional compute remains challenging.
arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.
The paper introduces the concept of an agent’s "taste"—its ability to make effective long‑horizon decisions—and presents Taste‑Bench, a new benchmark that automatically generates decision‑fork questions from agent trajectories. Taste‑Bench evaluates models on choosing the best path without seeing future outcomes, revealing that top models answer only about 60% of questions correctly and that later‑appearing evidence makes forks harder. The authors also demonstrate that training a student model to mimic a teacher’s judgment improves decision quality and overall success on held‑out software engineering tasks.
arXiv:2601. 18778v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: RL methods for scaling large reasoning models stall on datasets with low initial success rates, and thus little training signal.