arXiv AI

MARS: Margin-Adversarial Risk-controlled Stopping for Parallel LLM Test-time Scaling

arXiv:2606. 12935v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Parallel test-time scaling samples many reasoning traces and majority-votes their answers, improving LLM accuracy but requiring traces to run to completion, incurring substantial computational overhead.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 11

MARS: Margin-Adversarial Risk-controlled Stopping for Parallel LLM Test-time Scaling

Parallel test-time scaling samples many reasoning traces and majority-votes their answers, improving LLM accuracy but requiring traces to run to completion, incurring substantial computational overhead. We observe that probing partial traces at intermediate checkpoints can extract current answers without disrupting generation, revealing an evolving aggregate vote.

arXiv AI
Jul 28

DeepLook: Deeper Thinking with Lookahead

arXiv:2607. 22602v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Inference-time scaling has emerged as a powerful paradigm for improving large language model reasoning, often delivering larger gains on difficult reasoning tasks than parameter scaling alone.

By Tingxin Yang, Zefeng Wang, Mengyue Wang, Xingcheng Zhou, Yunpu Ma
arXiv AI
Jun 2

Benchmarking at the Edge of Comprehension

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.

By Samuele Marro, Jialin Yu, Emanuele La Malfa, Oishi Deb, Jiawei Li, Yibo Yang, Ebey Abraham, Sunando Sengupta, Eric Sommerlade, Michael Wooldridge, Philip Torr
arXiv AI
Jul 14

LLMs as a Jury: Cross-Model Consensus Can Outperform Process Reward Models for LLM Reasoning

arXiv:2607. 10139v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Selecting the correct answer from a pool of candidate reasoning chains is the engine of test-time scaling, yet the standard selectors each carry a cost: self-consistency inherits the errors of the single model it resamples, and trained reward models need labeled data and transfer poorly off-distribution.

By Ning Liu