arXiv:2606. 09856v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Post-training Large Language Models (LLMs) for reasoning typically focuses on deductive tasks such as mathematics and coding where correctness is verifiable.
By Liyi Zhang, Akshay K. Jagadish, Brenden M. Lake, Thomas L. Griffiths
arXiv:2606. 04503v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has greatly advanced large reasoning models (LRMs), but it requires timely training on a huge fully-annotated dataset.
By Guangcheng Zhu, Shenzhi Yang, Haobo Wang, Xing Zheng, Yingfan MA, Xuening Feng, Zhongqi Chen, Bowen Song, Weiqiang Wang, Gang Chen
arXiv:2607. 11089v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in complex reasoning tasks through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting.
By Mohammed Ehab, Aymane El Gadarri, Vivek F. Farias, Adam Jozefiak, Ciamac C. Moallemi
The next generation of mobile networks is envisioned as fully AI-native, with AI-RAN architectures embedding small language models (SLMs) to perform reasoning over real-time telemetry. The state-of-th...
The paper introduces CRAFT, a data‑centric fine‑tuning approach that aligns small language models (SLMs) for pre‑hoc reasoning in AI‑native 6G radio access networks (RAN). By automatically generating verified (input, trace, label) triplets and fine‑tuning with low‑rank adaptation, CRAFT achieves high accuracy and F1 scores on TRACTOR and IC xApp datasets while avoiding parse failures that plague RL methods like GRPO. It also reduces energy consumption by 59% compared to GRPO baselines, offering a more sustainable path to auditable AI in 6G RAN.
By Pranshav Gajjar, Vijay K Shah
arXiv:2605.24981v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Choosing a Large Language Model (LLM) for a given task requires comparing many strong candidates, yet standard evaluation relies on costly annotati...
By Yavuz Durmazkeser, Patrik Okanovic, Andreas Kirsch, Torsten Hoefler, Nezihe Merve G\"urel
arXiv:2509. 21013v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Given the prohibitive cost of pre-training large language models, it is essential to leverage smaller proxy models to optimize datasets before scaling up.
By Woosung Koh, Juyoung Suk, Sungjun Han, Se-Young Yun, Jamin Shin
arXiv:2607. 05992v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Mathematical reasoning has become a central task for evaluating and tuning reasoning Large Language Models (LLMs), yet existing benchmarks remain heavily biased toward high-resource languages, with English and Chinese dominating both pre-training corpora and evaluation suites.
By Daryna Dementieva, Nikolay Babakov, Kathy H\"ammerl, Ilseyar Alimova, Jind\v{r}ich Libovick\'y, Shu Okabe, Miras Baisbay, Lukas Edman, Abrorkhon Inomkhujaev, Antonia Karamolegkou, Mateusz Lango, Volkan \"Ozer, Nikola Selic, Subhankar Swain, Tsedeniya Kinfe Temesgen, Galit Bary Weisberg, Alexander Fraser
arXiv:2610.00571v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) have achieved substantial improvements in solving complex mathematical problems, but often produce lengthy, repetitive,...
By Barproda Halder, Qiuyi Zhang, Sanghamitra Dutta
Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in complex reasoning tasks through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. However, these models often exhibit "computational overthinking," generating redundant reasoning steps that increase latency and cost without improving accuracy.
arXiv:2602. 01997v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent work has shown that layer pruning can effectively compress large language models (LLMs) while retaining strong performance on classification benchmarks, often with little or no finetuning.
By Safal Shrestha, Anubhav Shrestha, Minwu Kim, Aadim Nepal, Keith Ross
The paper investigates whether the high costs of training chain-of-thought reasoning models can be reduced through algorithmic design. It introduces an autocurriculum approach that lets the model select which problems to focus on during training, showing that this method provably improves both supervised fine‑tuning and reinforcement learning. For supervised fine‑tuning, autocurriculum requires exponentially fewer reasoning demonstrations by targeting prompts where the model struggles, while for reinforcement learning it decouples computational cost from the quality of the reference model, making the burn‑in cost nearly independent of target accuracy.
By Nived Rajaraman, Audrey Huang, Miro Dudik, Robert Schapire, Dylan J. Foster, Akshay Krishnamurthy