arXiv:2606. 05145v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When post-trained language models fail on reasoning problems, the common test-time-scaling response is to spend more compute on additional attempts, and the failed traces play no further role.
arXiv:2608. 08570v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Rejection sampling fine-tuning (RFT) is widely used to train code agents by generating trajectories on verifiable software engineering tasks, retaining those that pass the tests, and fine-tuning on the successful rollouts.
arXiv:2606. 29377v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) improves the factuality of large language models by grounding responses in external evidence, yet real-world deployments remain fragile.
arXiv:2608. 07528v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Linear probes detect corrupted context in language models with near-perfect accuracy, yet this does not translate into reliable failure prediction.
arXiv:2605. 28742v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Language models can use verifiable rewards to improve at a wide variety of reasoning tasks.
arXiv:2607. 12747v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Failure attribution for LLM-based agentic systems, i.
arXiv:2607. 07492v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many reasoning tasks are not well described by a single left-to-right chain: a solver may need to pursue a plausible branch, observe delayed failure, and return to the latest prefix that can still be completed.
arXiv:2608. 11994v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We propose claim-level falsification as a principle for test-time scaling and instantiate it through Claim-Level Reliability Assessment (CLR), a training-free framework that reallocates test-time compute from additional solution sampling to targeted verification.
arXiv:2606. 09071v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents now solve complex tasks through long plan-and-execution traces, yet the ability to locate errors in a completed traces still lags far behind, especially in the \emph{silent failure} regime.
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:2606. 06635v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Failures in language model reasoning emerge through distinct processes that leave identifiable signatures in the reasoning trace.
arXiv:2606. 28471v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Model capability is the central variable in LLM pre-training, yet is never observed directly: data shapes it prospectively, while evaluation reveals it only retrospectively, compressing samples, prompts, decoding, and scoring rules into one noisy score.
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.