Large Language Models (LLMs) are frequently portrayed as general-purpose solvers capable of solving arbitrary tasks. We argue that this view overlooks a fundamental constraint: language is a compressed and capacity-limited interface for conveying task information.
arXiv:2608. 16068v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as agents that rely on system prompts to use tools and complete tasks.
arXiv:2607. 20500v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) perform strongly on well-specified reasoning tasks with a feasible answer.
arXiv:2608. 06933v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Today, we improve models by training and evaluating them on problems at the frontier of their abilities.
arXiv:2608. 12426v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed in settings that require simultaneous adherence to multiple explicit constraints - reasoning structure, safety boundaries, output schemas.
arXiv:2607. 20520v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly evaluated on mathematical problem solving, yet prior work often treats representationally equivalent formulations as interchangeable and conflates reasoning errors with interface failures.
arXiv:2602. 15983v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can translate natural language into optimization code, but silent failures pose a critical risk: code that executes and returns solver-feasible solutions may encode semantically incorrect formulations---a feasibility--correctness gap reaching 90 percentage points on compositional problems.
arXiv:2606. 28615v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains, where free-text explanations such as chain-of-thought and post-hoc rationales are used to justify model outputs.
arXiv:2603. 29025v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models fail when a salient surface cue conflicts with an unstated feasibility constraint.
arXiv:2606. 27721v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Compositional generalization, the ability to solve complex problems by combining solutions to simpler sub-problems, is a fundamental capability of both natural and artificial intelligence, and a key mechanism underlying chain-of-thought reasoning.
Theory of Mind (ToM) benchmarks for Large Language Models (LLMs) typically rely on passive question-answering formats, but the deployment of LLMs in increasingly agentic and autonomous forms demands new evaluations. In this paper we evaluate an agent's ability to induce specific belief states in other agents by taking actions rather than using conversational persuasion, a capability we call Non-Conversational Planning ToM (NCP-ToM).
arXiv:2607. 14105v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: For Large Language Models to reliably answer user queries, users must clearly specify requirements, context, and constraints.
arXiv:2607. 02686v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning agents operating under partial observability must act on incomplete information, making them natural candidates for guidance from small language models (SLMs) that carry broad reasoning priors.