arXiv AI
Jun 9
More Yap Less Meaning: Uncovering Self-Improvement Behavior in SLMs
arXiv:2606. 08471v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recently, language models have made rapid progress across various domains and applications.
Controlled Reformulation Testing for Logical Consistency in Large Language Models
arXiv:2607. 14528v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) frequently contradict themselves when the surface form of a logically equivalent question changes.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Sep 25
PROOF: Profiling Reliability of Object-Level Facts in Large Language Models
PROOF is a benchmark that profiles the reliability of object-level facts in instruction-tuned language models by converting a frozen Wikidata snapshot into 18,486 English multiple-choice questions grounded in 11,779 semantic facts across 101 classes, 392 properties, and 14 domains. Each question includes an explicit "I don't know" option, a "No correct option" control, and nine controlled formulations, with 1,849 questions designed as no-correct-option traps. The study evaluates 18 open-weight model deployments on 166,374 prompts, revealing wide variability in factual accuracy, sensitivity to wording changes, and the impact of decoder perturbations.
arXiv AI
Aug 13
When Self-Consistency Backfires: Majority Vote Hurts the Majority of Hard Science Problems for Small LLMs
arXiv:2608. 11403v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-consistency (SC) via majority vote is a widely used way to spend inference-time compute: sample N chains of thought, return the plurality answer.
arXiv AI
Aug 25
More Accurate or More Efficient? Evaluating Locally Deployed Compact Open-Weight Language Models for Mathematical Reasoning
arXiv:2608.22048v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed on local hardware for privacy, cost, and accessibility reasons. Yet many evaluations emphasize accuracy...
arXiv AI
Sep 10
LogicSkills: A Structured Benchmark for Formal Reasoning in Large Language Models
LogicSkills is a benchmark designed to isolate three core logical abilities in large language models: formal symbolization, countermodel construction, and validity assessment. The dataset draws items from the two-variable fragment of first‑order logic without identity, presented in both English and a Carrollian nonce‑word language, and all instances are solver‑verified with Z3. Results show that conventional instruction‑tuned LLMs excel at validity assessment but struggle with symbolization and countermodel construction, whereas recent reasoning‑tuned models perform well across all tasks, indicating a more systematic logical skill profile.
arXiv AI
Jul 28
Same Question, Different Answers: Evaluating LLM Reliability Beyond Accuracy
arXiv:2607. 22554v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often achieve strong accuracy on benchmarks, yet it remains unclear how reliably they apply this knowledge when the same question is phrased in different but equivalent ways.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 14
Silent Failures in Quantized LLM Reasoning: A Taxonomy-Based Analysis of Hollow Convergence and Failure Mode Shifts
arXiv:2607. 09999v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We show that post-training quantization can silently alter how large language models reason even when task accuracy is preserved.
arXiv AI
Aug 11
Reproducing and Stress-Testing Two Approaches to LLM Reasoning Reliability: Test-Time Probability Aggregation and Logic-Representation Editing
arXiv:2608. 08514v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We independently reproduce two recent methods for making large language model (LLM) reasoning more reliable, and stress-test them across domains and models (RPC across four new task domains with Qwen3-8B, LCF across four 7-8B models).
arXiv AI
Sep 1
Beyond the Answer Key: Robustness Evaluation of Large Language Models for Step-Level Mathematical Verification
arXiv:2608.28725v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as graders, verifiers, and process auditors, but most mathematical evaluations still emphasize final...
arXiv AI
Aug 11
Test-Time Augmentation for LLMs: When Input Diversity Beats Output Diversity at Matched Compute
arXiv:2608. 09351v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Test-time scaling improves LLM accuracy but multiplies inference cost, making the accuracy gained per unit of compute the metric that matters in deployment.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 24
Test-Time Scaling via Error Localization
arXiv:2607. 21453v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scaling inference-time computation has emerged as a reliable method to improve the performance of large language models on complex reasoning and programming tasks.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 2
Testing LLM Arithmetic Reasoning Generalization with Automatic Numeric-Remapping Attacks
Large language models achieve strong performance on arithmetic reasoning benchmarks, and one common response to arithmetic brittleness is to delegate computation to code. Yet models are still often used in settings where they must reason directly from natural language, and trustworthy models should solve small-number arithmetic word problems without external tools.