The paper investigates whether a frozen large language model can be personalized to individual users via prompt-space meta‑learning. Using the Muse framework, the authors evolve a shared adaptation prompt across a meta‑train user population and test it zero‑shot on over 200 held‑out users in two personalization benchmarks (LaMP‑2 and LaMP‑3). The results show that Muse does not outperform its un‑evolved seed prompt or a control that trains on mismatched user‑support pairs, and it is outperformed by simple few‑shot retrieval on the rating task. The authors attribute this failure to a meta‑objective collapse, where the validation objective is invariant to genuine user‑support correspondence, leading to over‑optimization of instruction polish rather than transferable adaptation.
arXiv:2606. 32032v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Metacognition is a critical component of intelligence that describes the ability to monitor and regulate one's own cognitive processes.
arXiv:2608. 09507v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Natural language user preferences provide an interpretable interface for LLM personalization.
arXiv:2609.21626v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed for enterprise information extraction (IE), where the same document must be reorganized differen...
arXiv:2608. 09109v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: User feedback offers natural supervision for persistent LLM improvement, but a single message may support multiple behavioral changes with different scopes of generalization.
arXiv:2608. 08829v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Activation steering edits the behaviour of a frozen language model by adding a learned vector to its residual stream, and current practice fixes the injection layers globally per task.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in complex, compound AI systems where performance hinges on the quality of prompts. Recent state-of-the-art optimizers like GEPA (Genetic-Pareto) have argued that reflective instruction evolution can outperform traditional reinforcement learning and few-shot optimization.
arXiv:2604. 00830v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Test-Time Learning (TTL) enables language agents to iteratively refine their performance through repeated interactions with the environment at inference time.
arXiv:2607. 01480v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), along with recent selfdistillation variants such as SDPO, evaluates each rollout against a verifier and updates the policy from that episode-level signal.
arXiv:2608. 05813v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personalizing language models (LMs) to individual user preferences is essential for aligning responses with diverse goals and backgrounds.
arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.
arXiv:2607. 18293v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: On-policy self-distillation (OPSD) teaches large language models new skills through a teacher that shares the student's backbone and supervises its own rollouts.
The paper investigates why prompt optimization works better for some tasks than others by decomposing reward variance into response variance and system‑prompt variance. It finds that optimization succeeds when system‑prompt variance dominates, and that adding more user prompts can actually reduce this variance, especially on heterogeneous datasets. To address this, the authors propose $p1$, a filtering method that selects a small set of high‑variance user prompts, which improves optimization on reasoning benchmarks and even allows a system prompt trained on just two AIME 24 prompts to generalize well.