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.
The Agent Error Dataset (AED) presents 50,228 error–diagnosis pairs collected from 9,961 source tasks across 33 environments, 19 harness families, and 23 policy models in text‑based agent systems. A five‑stage Agentic Error‑to‑Training (AET) pipeline generates diagnoses and proposed corrections, verifies them against recorded evidence, and creates separate training views for diagnosis and actor recovery. Experiments show that first‑proposal corrections improve verifier pass rates from 18.4% to 51.1%, and fine‑tuning with full‑diagnosis data raises Qwen3‑8B’s exact‑step agreement from 47.2% to 63.6% on a holdout set.
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:2608.22138v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language models are usually judged by a single accuracy score, which does not reveal how their performance degrades as inputs are perturbed. We present...
arXiv:2609.35793v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly trained with reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR). An exact verifier can also support te...
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.
The study investigates whether hints that convert failing code generation attempts into passing ones provide new information or simply guide models toward solutions they could already generate. Using Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct and Phi-3.5-mini on HumanEval+ and MBPP+, the authors find that relevant hints rescue a significant portion of failures, yet many of those solutions are also recoverable through ordinary sampling. Mechanistic tests reveal a shared activation direction between relevant and unrelated hints, but adding this direction does not improve overall accuracy, indicating limited task-general transfer.