arXiv:2607. 23440v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In this paper, we push the boundary of LLM reasoning by testing them in a Chinese language game, xiehouyu, with novel xiehouyu created by linguists that had not existed before to avoid data contamination.
By Hai Hu, Siyuan Song, Chongtian Shao, Kejia Zhang, Tianjian Zhu, Xiaojing Zhao
arXiv:2603. 18482v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Standard decoding strategies for text generation, including top-$k$, nucleus sampling, and contrastive search, select tokens based on likelihood, restricting outputs to high-probability regions.
By Esteban Garces Arias, Nurzhan Sapargali, Christian Heumann, Matthias A{\ss}enmacher
arXiv:2604. 19139v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) continue to evolve through alignment techniques such as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and Constitutional AI, a growing and increasingly conspicuous phenomenon has emerged: the proliferation of verbal tics--repetitive, formulaic linguistic patterns that pervade model outputs.
By Shuai Wu, Xue Li, Yanna Feng, Yufang Li, Zhijun Wang, Ran Wang
arXiv:2607. 11020v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Continual learning promises a language model that keeps acquiring knowledge after training, with each new fact written into its weights.
By Charles O'Neill
arXiv:2608. 11816v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: State-aligned distortion has been documented in China-origin text-based large language models (LLMs), but whether, and in what form, it arises in multimodal systems has not been systematically examined.
By Guang Yang, Fengchen Liu, Alex Wang, Homa Hosseinmardi, Amir Ghasemian
Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled sophisticated reasoning and content generation, yet their inherent stochasticity poses significant challenges for ensuring predictive credibility. While traditional uncertainty taxonomy paradigms, such as the dichotomy of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties, provide conceptual foundations, they often fail to capture the multi-component and multi-stage nature of LLM generation and struggle to evaluate the effectiveness of various Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) methods.
When a tool-using agent is given the same task in a different language, does it still take the same steps? Multilingual evaluation rarely asks: it compares final answers and discards the actions.
arXiv:2608. 15448v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models increasingly rely on sampling as a driver of their own improvement, making the fidelity of their learned distributions more critical than ever.
By Nicolas Zucchet, Hyun Dong Lee, Scott Linderman
arXiv:2607. 13568v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Can a language model estimate its familiarity with an entity before generating an answer?
By Grzegorz Brzezinka
arXiv:2602. 18733v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Training data leakage from Large Language Models (LLMs) raises serious concerns related to privacy, security, and copyright compliance.
By Trishita Tiwari, Ari Trachtenberg, G. Edward Suh
arXiv:2607. 18305v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Some limits on what language models know are not gaps in data coverage but structural properties of learning from text.
By Priyansh Srivastava, Romit Chatterjee
arXiv:2608. 02486v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Open-source LLMs reliably name Zeus, Jupiter, and Thor, but recover their counterparts in less-represented traditions like Finnish, Slavic, Egyptian, or Chinese mythology far less consistently.
By Iaroslav Chelombitko, Ekaterina Chelombitko, Mika H\"am\"al\"ainen