arXiv:2607. 12397v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents act in external environments where each action changes the state that later decisions condition on, and where a single wrong step can waste interaction budget or trigger irreversible side effects long before the final failure is observed.
By Yaopei Zeng, Congchao Wang, JianHang Chen, Nan Wang, Yurui Chang, Lu Lin
arXiv:2508. 14390v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often express verbal confidence that is poorly aligned with actual correctness, limiting their reliability in safety-critical applications.
By Ke Fang, Tianyi Zhao, Qianwen Wang, Lu Cheng
Large language model (LLM) agents solving multi-step tasks frequently commit to trajectories that are doomed to fail, yet continue to consume substantial inference compute before the failure becomes observable. We show that failure is predictable early from the agent's internal representations: lightweight per-round probes on hidden activations anticipate eventual episode failure as early as the first interaction round, where scorers reading only the agent's observable behavior are barely better than chance.
arXiv:2606. 18327v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language models (LMs) that faithfully describe their own behavior can more easily be audited, understood, and trusted by users.
By Itamar Pres, Laura Ruis, Melat Ghebreselassie, Belinda Z. Li, Jacob Andreas
arXiv:2608. 06861v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training large language model agents in long-horizon environments requires assigning credit from sparse terminal outcomes to individual actions.
By Hongxi Yan, Ziyue Huang, Shichao Fan, Qingjie Liu
arXiv:2607. 05541v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning is commonly used to train large language models using environmental feedback.
By Muhammad Zain Amin, Kibele Sebnem Yildirim
arXiv:2607. 12236v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Speculative execution accelerates LLM agents by using a smaller, cheaper model to predict and pre-launch the next step while the environment is idle.
By Yu Li, Qinyuan Ye, Prafulla Kumar Choubey, Jiaxin Zhang, Chien-Sheng Wu
arXiv:2607. 01480v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), along with recent selfdistillation variants such as SDPO, evaluates each rollout against a verifier and updates the policy from that episode-level signal.
By Ye Liu, Srijan Bansal, Bo Pang, Yang Li, Zeyu Leo Liu, Yifei Ming, Zixuan Ke, Shafiq Joty, Semih Yavuz
arXiv:2606. 05805v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based guardrails typically safeguard agents by evaluating proposed actions or inputs before execution, producing safety signals such as binary allow/deny decisions, risk categories, and/or explanatory rationales about potential policy violations.
By Yuhao Sun, Jiacheng Zhang, Shaanan Cohney, Zhexin Zhang, Feng Liu, Xingliang Yuan
arXiv:2607. 28908v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reflection, the ability to revisit and revise prior reasoning, is central to how humans improve their answers.
By Yefan Tao, Gerald Friedland, Madhusudhanan Chandrasekaran, Luyang Kong
arXiv:2608. 04788v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model agents are commonly trained through reinforcement learning with sparse trajectory-level rewards, which offer limited guidance on how strongly individual tokens should be updated.
By Yi Yang, Cong Qin, Xiaodan Liu, Chishui Chen, Qing Dong, Yan Zhang, Cao Liu, Zhao Yang, Lu Pan, Jiaye Lin, Yi Feng
Vision-Language-Action models (VLAs) integrate visual perception, language instruction, and action generation into end-to-end policies across heterogeneous architectures. However, enabling VLAs to self-evaluate their action generation reliability without external supervision remains a major challenge.