arXiv:2606. 01060v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Preference alignment has substantially improved the observable behavior of large language models, yet it remains unclear what alignment changes internally.
By Partha Pratim Saha, Samarth Raina, Mayur Parvatikar, Amit Dhanda, Vinija Jain, Aman Chadha, Amitava Das
arXiv:2608.29610v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: The current alignment tuning paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs) prioritizes surface-level behaviors -- fluency, safety, and tonal consistency. W...
By Chenghao Yang
arXiv:2603.18908v5 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Independently trained language models often learn compatible late-stage representations, despite differences in training objectives, architectures,...
By Matt Gorbett, Suman Jana
Warning: This paper studies stereotypes and biases, and contains potentially disturbing examples, used for illustration purposes only. Our findings should not be interpreted as an argument against alignment.
arXiv:2608. 11027v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmark leaderboards summarize how well a language model performs, but not how its behavior relates to that of other models or changes across generations.
By Dong Qiao, Chris Ding, Jicong Fan
arXiv:2607. 21433v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Chain-of-thought reasoning models such as DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B exhibit a bimodal convergence pattern: generations either terminate within a token budget (converged) or exhaust it without reaching a conclusion (non-converged).
By Renuka Oladri, Niveda Jawahar, Abdirisak Mohamed
arXiv:2609.16454v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Recent work by Doshi and Hauser (2024), Bisbee et al. (2024), and Xie et al. (2026) raises concerns that outputs from large language models (LLMs) tend...
By Kirill Skobelev, Eric Fithian, X. Y. Han
arXiv:2606. 11552v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks, but their autoregressive decoding process incurs substantial inference costs due to inherently sequential token generation.
By Lexington Whalen, Yuki Ito, Ryo Sakamoto
The paper introduces Variance‑Calibrated Modulation (VCM), a training‑free pre‑decoding technique that reshapes language model probability distributions before truncation. VCM uses two dynamic mechanisms: a Contextual Searchlight via PMI to suppress stopwords and highlight context‑relevant tokens, and an Adaptive Self‑Debiasing that applies scale‑invariant penalization based on real‑time logit standard deviation. Experiments on open‑ended generation, factual QA, and mathematical reasoning show that VCM consistently reduces the likelihood trap, improving diversity, coherence, and reasoning accuracy with minimal computational cost.
By Yuanhao Ding, Meimingwei Li, Esteban Garces Arias, Matthias A{\ss}enmacher, Christian Heumann, Chongsheng Zhang
arXiv:2606. 07537v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models hallucinate--producing fluent, confident, factually wrong outputs--with a consistency that persists across generations and scales.
By Md. Rejaul Korim Sadi, Toufiqur Rahman Tasin, Golam Mostofa Naeem
arXiv:2606. 31591v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Emergent misalignment (EM) is a recently discovered phenomenon in LLMs where fine-tuning on a narrow misaligned task, such as writing insecure code, leads to broadly misaligned behaviour on unrelated prompts.
By Jason R. Brown, Patrick Leask, Lev McKinney
arXiv:2608. 11694v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A benchmark score comes from a single phrasing of each problem.
By Shailja Thakur, Sungeun An, Chad DeLuca, Hima Patel