arXiv:2609.07943v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: There is significant uncertainty about whether abstractions like beliefs or desires usefully describe the behavior of large language models (LLMs). In...
arXiv:2607. 17948v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent-based models (ABMs) rely on simple, explicit and reproducible rules for individual decision making, while complex collective behavior emerges from interactions among agents.
arXiv:2608. 08467v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The Model Context Protocol (MCP) standardizes how servers expose data and tools to Large Language Models (LLMs).
arXiv:2606. 05792v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: TLA+ has supported industrial verification at companies such as Amazon and Microsoft, yet writing correct TLA+ specifications from natural language still requires time and expertise, which limits adoption.
arXiv:2606. 30441v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A rigorous formalization of system requirements is a fundamental prerequisite for the verification of Multi-Agent Systems (MAS).
arXiv:2606. 22974v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent work on preference elicitation in large language models (LLMs) has demonstrated that, when given a series of choices between two outcomes, LLMs reveal a coherent, model-specific utility structure.
arXiv:2607. 14109v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Probing the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) and building robust solutions for Multiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA) remain central challenges in natural language understanding.
The paper evaluates the planning abilities of large language model (LLM) agents by comparing their performance against formal semantics defined in hidden PDDL models. Across five domains, four LLMs, six prompting strategies, and three agent architectures, the best setup solved 78% of solvable tasks offline but only 40% online, with limited recognition of unsolvable tasks and no clear benefit from more elaborate prompting. The study concludes that claims of LLM planning competence require validated action traces rather than end‑to‑end success rates.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are frequently portrayed as general-purpose solvers capable of solving arbitrary tasks. We argue that this view overlooks a fundamental constraint: language is a compressed and capacity-limited interface for conveying task information.
arXiv:2608. 04719v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent evaluations tell us that a model picked the wrong tool, but rarely why.
arXiv:2606. 29116v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted in low-code and no-code automation platforms, where non-expert users design workflows that combine natural language understanding with external services and APIs.
arXiv:2508.01300v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI planning provides agents the ability to act autonomously towards achieving a goal in a given environment. Recent advances in Large Language Mode...