arXiv:2610.26380v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: This paper considers a decision-maker tasked with identifying the $k$ best items from a large pool of candidates, such as job applicants, LLM...
arXiv:2609.38860v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Learning from human preferences is central to large language model (LLM) alignment, but human preference annotation is costly. Active preference lear...
arXiv:2605. 04267v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Interactive multi-objective optimization systems face a budget allocation dilemma: one can spend resources on expensive objective evaluations or on eliciting decision-maker preferences that identify the relevant region of the Pareto set.
arXiv:2610.14996v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Choosing a few robust algorithms or schedules can require evaluating every candidate under many adverse scenarios, even though an agent only needs to i...
The paper introduces ExTS, a tree‑search policy designed for budget‑constrained agentic search where evaluation and generation costs are high. ExTS treats expansion as a value‑of‑information decision, combining discriminative reward shaping, a stochastic virtual child, and quality‑conditioned branching to allocate budget more effectively. Experiments on prompt optimization, code generation, molecular structure elucidation, and agentic workflow optimization show ExTS matching or surpassing task‑specific baselines with an average gain of +5.5% using a single configuration, and the authors also present pilot‑run diagnostics to guide adaptation to different problem structures.
arXiv:2607. 25136v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Research on preference optimization often varies the training objective while holding the data fixed.
arXiv:2606. 15623v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pairwise comparison is the gold standard for subjective ranking tasks; however, exhaustive annotation requires a massive number of human comparisons ($O(n^2)$).
arXiv:2609.07749v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Crowdsourcing platforms coordinate large pools of online workers who strategically choose which contests to enter and how much effort to invest. This s...
arXiv:2610.14028v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Data selection for LLM fine-tuning faces two facts about real training: data pools draw from many distinct domains, and evaluation spans diverse task...
arXiv:2608. 19993v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Loading reusable skill documents into a bounded context window is now the primary way large language model (LLM) agents acquire task-specific capabilities, which makes skill selection a first-order determinant of task performance and token cost.
arXiv:2608. 04333v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) configuration evaluation is challenging due to limited evaluation budgets, varying costs, and multiple competing objectives.
The paper introduces SPLIT, a method that optimally allocates test‑time compute among sampling, model selection, and verification for language models and agents. Using an exact probability formula that accounts for task difficulty, shared blind spots, and verifier correlations, SPLIT is fitted via empirical Bayes on a small labeled pilot and then used to plan budgets for unseen tasks. Across seven diverse benchmarks, 26 models, and six verifier types, SPLIT achieves near‑optimal performance, outperforming rule‑based baselines by up to 2.5 percentage points and providing insights into when additional LLM judges reduce precision.