The paper evaluates how three large mixture‑of‑experts models (Alibaba, OpenAI, NVIDIA) can be fine‑tuned to reason in a low‑resource language, specifically Greek. Accuracy metrics show little change, but the authors uncover significant qualitative improvements: after supervised fine‑tuning, models reason in Greek on ~98% of items, with better grammaticality and retained general ability. Reinforcement learning with pre‑registered rewards further eliminates reasoning‑channel leaks and format skips, while the Greek‑reasoning habit remains robust to an accuracy‑only gradient.
arXiv:2609.37104v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Open-source reasoning models provide unequal access to reasoning capability across languages. When a model can solve a problem but cannot deliver a c...
arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.
arXiv:2609.38612v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As natural language drives more applications, language models increasingly run inside programs as decision components: the program sends them the curre...
arXiv:2607. 14552v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A standard recipe for distilling the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs) is to sample chains of thought from the model, keep those that reach the correct final answer, and fine-tune on the survivors.
PROOF is a benchmark that profiles the reliability of object-level facts in instruction-tuned language models by converting a frozen Wikidata snapshot into 18,486 English multiple-choice questions grounded in 11,779 semantic facts across 101 classes, 392 properties, and 14 domains. Each question includes an explicit "I don't know" option, a "No correct option" control, and nine controlled formulations, with 1,849 questions designed as no-correct-option traps. The study evaluates 18 open-weight model deployments on 166,374 prompts, revealing wide variability in factual accuracy, sensitivity to wording changes, and the impact of decoder perturbations.
arXiv:2607. 16097v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning (RL) has become central to improving large language models (LLMs) on complex reasoning tasks, yet RL post-training is largely studied in isolation from the pretraining that precedes it.
arXiv:2606. 01080v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models often improve on difficult tasks by spending inference-time compute on a reasoning trace before producing the final answer.
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:2606. 27472v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents operate over long, multi-session interactions in which facts change: a user moves, a price updates, a plan is revised.
arXiv:2607. 01927v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper presents TUDUM (T\"urk\c{c}e D\"u\c{s}\"unen \"Uretken Model), a project pipeline for adapting a Qwen-family 27B thinking model toward Turkish reasoning.
arXiv:2609.39702v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Adapting a language model to a specialized corpus means choosing which instruction-tuning tasks to train on under a fixed budget, and testing one choic...
The paper introduces Jev, a reinforcement‑learning‑trained model that provides calibrated probability answers to typed questions about a single input in one call. Jev is evaluated on RLCDAlignBench, a benchmark covering ten alignment failures across 44 tests and five target models, achieving a median AUROC of 0.886 zero‑shot and outperforming supervised baselines on most tasks. The study shows that question wording has little impact, while contextual fields that encode labels are more influential, and that Jev matches human‑label agreement while being 63× cheaper than LLM‑judge scorers.