Constrained Path Reasoning: Measuring When Committed Stages Earn Their Cost
arXiv:2607. 17240v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When does a committed intermediate stage in an LLM reasoning pipeline earn its cost?
arXiv:2606. 31023v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Hard-constrained sequential decision systems have no certified way to spend the test-time compute of modern AI: executing the multi-step drafts of a learned policy or a frozen LLM forfeits the feasibility guarantee a trusted solver provides, while invoking the solver at every step forfeits the speed the AI offers.
arXiv:2607. 17240v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When does a committed intermediate stage in an LLM reasoning pipeline earn its cost?
arXiv:2608. 07583v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent LLM systems route among model-backed advisors, yet a deployer rarely knows before shipping whether routing will help at all.
arXiv:2606. 11688v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-horizon LLM agents are not trusted to run unattended: with no human watching, they confidently report success they never verified.
arXiv:2606. 19808v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Test-time reasoning is increasingly used as a serving-time control knob, but extra reasoning is not uniformly valuable: it can repair failed attempts, waste compute on already-correct answers, or introduce harmful answer changes.
arXiv:2606. 07846v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-agent workflows chain model calls and tool invocations, and spend most of their wall-clock time waiting on upstream operations before downstream ones can start.
arXiv:2607. 13070v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Safety claims for self-improving agent runtimes are almost always self-graded: a policy file, a guardrail, a promise in a README.
arXiv:2607. 00871v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-evolving agents violate the assumption behind most learning-theoretic guarantees: the data, evaluator, components, and hypothesis space are produced by the policy being updated.
arXiv:2608. 04611v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Frontier coding models now match or exceed strong human reference points on programming benchmarks, yet benchmark success does not imply maintainable software.
arXiv:2606. 29654v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent deliberation among LLMs can improve reasoning, but deployment requires deciding when the current answer is reliable enough to act on and when it should be escalated to human review.
arXiv:2606. 07316v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Byzantine collaboration among large-language-model agents requires a finality-control primitive: given delivered stochastic, structured natural-language proposals, the protocol must decide whether the round supports a commit, what kind of commit, or a typed safe abort.
arXiv:2607. 23806v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Improving a language model today means retraining it: enormous compute, a new opaque model each cycle, non-deterministic output.
arXiv:2608. 03447v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Speculative decoding accelerates autoregressive generation by verifying a draft block with a target model in parallel.