arXiv:2606. 19625v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We use training-data attribution as an interpretable tool for capability discovery, mapping which regions of the pretraining corpus support social-reasoning versus STEM-reasoning in OLMo3-7B.
By Glenn Matlin, Chandreyi Chakraborty, Saehee Eom, Mika Okamoto, Rayan Castilla, Louis Jaburi, Alvin Deng, Taywon Min, Lucia Quirke, Stella Biderman, Mark Riedl
arXiv:2404.06349v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: The ability to understand causality significantly impacts the competence of large language models (LLMs) in output explanation and counterfactual r...
By Yu Zhou, Xingyu Wu, Jibin Wu, Liang Feng, Kay Chen Tan
arXiv:2607. 23804v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Context attribution methods for large language models (LLMs) identify which input context contributes to the model response.
By Quoc-Huy Trinh, Lin Zhu, Sebastian Szyller
arXiv:2608. 07885v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reasoning modes of language models outperform their non-reasoning counterparts on multi-step agentic tasks, but pay a 3-6x premium in output tokens on every episode -- much of it spent re-deriving procedures that are shared across episodes of the same domain.
By Agamdeep Singh, Srishti Gautam, Priyanshu Gupta, Nikita Mehrotra, Tanmay Bakshi, Sumit Gulwani
The paper introduces ElephantBench, a closed‑book knowledge probe with 1,094 multi‑account factual questions generated via an auditable graph‑based pipeline that pulls documents from a low‑exposure web corpus and identifies naturally occurring disagreements. Across 32 large language models, even the best model only recovers both divergent accounts on 52.4% of questions, and most models recall one account while omitting the other, indicating persistent epistemic myopia. The study shows that scaling model size and inference‑time reasoning improves recall but does not eliminate incompleteness, and that exposure imbalance in the corpus biases models toward the dominant account.
By Zhuoshi Pan, Junru Lu, Yan Qian, H. Vicky Zhao, Di Yin, Xing Sun
arXiv:2512. 04144v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Targeted interventions on language models, such as unlearning or model editing, aim to modify specific information, but their effects often propagate to related, unintended areas (e.
By Roy Rinberg, Usha Bhalla, Igor Shilov, Flavio P. Calmon, Rohit Gandikota
arXiv:2608. 20106v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We introduce OenoBench, a wine-domain knowledge benchmark of 3,266 multiple-choice questions across six pillars (regions, grape varieties, viticulture, winemaking, producers, business) and four difficulty tiers.
By Nikita Khudov
arXiv:2606. 15390v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM agents can improve without weight updates by accumulating natural-language skills from experience, but current systems entrust every decision about which skills to keep and how to apply them to LLM judgment alone.
By Yixuan Wang, Yiyang Zhou, Yiming Liang, Congyu Zhang, Fuxiao Liu, Jiawei Zhou, Huaxiu Yao
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as integrated data-science agents, combining abstract reasoning with advanced tool use. Yet the relevant benchmark landscape largely divides into symbolic causal reasoning benchmarks without realistic data analysis or data analysis benchmarks without a principled causal data-generating structure.
SocialMaze is a new benchmark designed to evaluate large language models on social reasoning tasks that involve deep reasoning, dynamic interaction, and information uncertainty. It comprises six tasks drawn from social deduction games, everyday interactions, and digital communities, and includes automated checks and human validation to ensure data quality. Experiments with twelve LLMs reveal that stronger chain‑of‑thought reasoning improves performance on deeper inference tasks, while uncertainty consistently hurts results; targeted fine‑tuning on curated reasoning traces can markedly enhance structured social‑reasoning abilities.
By Zixiang Xu, Yanbo Wang, Yue Huang, Haomin Zhuang, Yujun Zhou, Jiayi Ye, Sixian Li, Zirui Song, Lang Gao, Chenxi Wang, Zhaorun Chen, Wang Pan, Yue Zhao, Jieyu Zhao, Xiangliang Zhang, Xiuying Chen
The paper argues that large language models (LLMs) organize their internal mathematical reasoning by reusable reasoning approaches rather than by the benchmark topics they are tested on. Using a generation‑replay protocol, the authors extract activation‑importance signatures from eight models across five math sources, cluster these signatures, and find that the resulting groups align more closely with reasoning approaches than with topics. The study shows that changing the requested reasoning approach shifts cluster assignments, while paraphrasing the prompt does not, underscoring the primacy of approach over topic in LLM reasoning.
By Sajad Goudarzi, Samaneh Zamanifard, Moloud Nasiri, Hamed Rahimian
arXiv:2607. 08093v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as integrated data-science agents, combining abstract reasoning with advanced tool use.
By Andrej Leban, Yuekai Sun