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.
By Qiaobo Hao, Yangqian Wu, Shunyi Wang, Zhongjian Zhang, Ziqun Li, Yayin He, Muqing Li, Chen Zhong
arXiv:2608. 05151v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Wastewater operators need answers grounded in how their plant's variables interact and how fast effects propagate, not in generic pretraining text, when asking causal questions such as "why is N2O rising?
By Gary Simethy, Daniel Ortiz Arroyo, Petar Durdevic
arXiv:2608. 16394v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generating regulation-compliant test scenarios is essential for validating safety-critical automotive systems, yet Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle to ground outputs in long, hierarchical standards.
By Vahid Zolfaghari, Nenad Petrovic, Andr\'E Schamschurko, Alois Knoll
arXiv:2607. 29431v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models increasingly generate optimization models from natural language, but existing evaluation often reduces a generated model and its ground truth to a single equivalent/not-equivalent verdict or an execution-success rate--labels that are neither independently checkable nor faithful to the multiple distinct senses in which two formulations can agree.
By Penglin Zhu, Jungang Xu
arXiv:2608. 05162v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pooling is a consequential but under-examined design choice in decoder-only concept representation work: practitioners must collapse token-level hidden states into a passage-level vector, yet no shared protocol exists for comparing this choice across concepts, models, and tasks.
By Ayushi Agarwal
arXiv:2607. 18553v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Can a language model read the quality of ongoing computation, and can an external intervention turn that readout into better outcomes?
By Jan Kirin
arXiv:2606. 09118v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As LLM capabilities advance rapidly, the evaluation methods used to assess them increasingly lag behind.
By Sushant Mehta, Liudas Panavas, Edwin Chen
arXiv:2608. 07529v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as technical assistants, but their competence in solid waste management (SWM) remains difficult to assess because existing benchmarks emphasize general knowledge rather than professional decisions under engineering, environmental, and policy constraints.
By Yi Zhang, Hongyang Wang, Zheng Hao Leong, Zihao Wu, Kaijun Lin, Zhixing Pan, Qixun Huangfu, Wei Ren, Wenyan Wu, Fangyun Wang, Wenting Yu, Hengyu Lin, Muling Yang, Zongguo Wen
arXiv:2608. 12426v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed in settings that require simultaneous adherence to multiple explicit constraints - reasoning structure, safety boundaries, output schemas.
By Mariya I. Vasileva
arXiv:2606. 28471v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Model capability is the central variable in LLM pre-training, yet is never observed directly: data shapes it prospectively, while evaluation reveals it only retrospectively, compressing samples, prompts, decoding, and scoring rules into one noisy score.
By Zhixuan Li, Jiangan Yuan, Han Xu
arXiv:2607. 09438v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Test-time scaling (TTS) reliably improves reasoning in large language models, but whether it transfers to small open vision-language models remains unclear.
By Spiros Baxevanakis, Peng-Jian Yang
arXiv:2607. 14707v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models routinely produce fluent answers to single-shot prompts, yet deploying them as reliable components of a domain decision system is substantially harder.
By Akash Raj