arXiv:2607. 09709v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-training a code generator against a learned judge can optimize proxy features that raise the score without improving the artifact.
arXiv:2607.09709v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Post-training a code generator against a learned judge can optimize proxy features that raise the score without improving the artifact. We study th...
arXiv:2607. 05904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training a language model against its own reference-free judgments (the premise of self-rewarding, self-play, and LLM-as-a-judge pipelines) assumes a model's verdict on a shown answer tracks correctness.
arXiv:2606. 07856v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a language model trains on its own verified outputs, does it acquire capability beyond its base, or merely get better at expressing capability the base already had?
arXiv:2608.29030v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In-context watermarking (ICW) prepends an instruction to a query asking the model to embed a statistically detectable signal in its response. It thus e...
arXiv:2606. 25964v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Small ($\sim$2B) GUI-grounding agents are attractive for on-device deployment, accessibility tooling, and low-cost iteration, but at this scale they face two open recipe questions: how to obtain bounding-box training data without expensive human annotation, and how to combine supervised fine-tuning with reinforcement learning.
PROOF-Gen is a method that improves distillation of tool‑calling models by recovering successful trajectories from teacher failures. It uses per‑scenario prompt optimization to generate corrective guidance that steers the teacher to a passing trajectory, then removes this guidance before training so the student learns from clean demonstrations. On τ2‑bench, PROOF-Gen recovers 93% of failed scenarios, boosting Qwen3‑4B‑Instruct‑2507’s Pass^1 from 0.132 to 0.529 and improving Gemma 4 E4B‑it by 7.2pp on BFCL v4 multi‑turn, while also raising deployed on‑device model performance by up to 5.0pp across response‑quality metrics.
The study investigates how inference‑time interventions and weight consolidation affect open‑ended generation in an online bin‑packing task. By iteratively generating, verifying, selecting, and consolidating with LoRA, the model’s outputs shift toward higher value, reducing excess by 1.7 points and outperforming random consolidation by 3.1 points. Across three independent runs, the mean performance remained consistent, and the best candidates converged to the classic heuristic’s level without exceeding it, while consolidation also lowered the proportion of better‑than‑classic candidates but increased their absolute number.
arXiv:2606. 14629v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Verifier-driven self-DPO is a common recipe for self-improving production visual-language models.
arXiv:2609.06107v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Data policies for reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) determine which rollouts are used, how strongly they are weighted, and which do...
arXiv:2607. 08268v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: High-volume structured extraction pays a large model's latency on every item, so distilling the task into a small on-device model is attractive: comparable output at a fraction of the time and cost.
The study evaluates how to best split tasks among large‑language‑model agents for cross‑border VAT determination, comparing one broad agent to configurations ranging from one to five narrow agents. Across 4,400 runs—including token‑matched and failure‑injection scenarios—the intermediate configurations achieved the highest accuracy but did not surpass the fine‑endpoint benchmark, leaving the optimal decomposition hypothesis unconfirmed. The pilot provides a preregistered heuristic for right‑sizing decomposition, along with an oracle, dataset, and analysis pipeline.
The paper evaluates hard‑gate candidacy for validators in a deployed generative‑agent system by measuring how well each validator’s firing separates successful from failed builds. Across 13 validators and thousands of builds, only a few checks show statistically significant separation, while many fail to distinguish or never fire. The study highlights that skipped checks are recorded as passes, limiting detectable failure rates and underscoring the need for clearer evaluation records.