The paper investigates how per-domain data composition during the mid‑training phase (between pre‑training and alignment) affects model performance. Experiments with Qwen3‑8B‑Base across five KOR‑Bench domains show that a moderate coverage band (10%‑40%) yields the best performance for each domain, and that alignment passes cannot fully close the gaps created by suboptimal mid‑training allocations. Additionally, zero coverage during mid‑training severely degrades accuracy, while a carefully tuned allocation can provide the largest overall pipeline improvement.
arXiv:2607. 17136v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic computer-use RL is reported in single runs, and those numbers mislead.
By Barada Sahu (Cabal AI), Shivesh Pandey (Para AI)
arXiv:2608. 13087v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Neural combinatorial optimization (NCO) solvers report the best of many sampled solutions per instance, and the sample count is, by convention, identical for every instance.
By Jinhyung Bae
The study evaluates how to best split tasks among large‑language‑model agents for cross‑border VAT determination, comparing one broad agent to configurations ranging from one to five narrow agents. Across 4,400 runs—including token‑matched and failure‑injection scenarios—the intermediate configurations achieved the highest accuracy but did not surpass the fine‑endpoint benchmark, leaving the optimal decomposition hypothesis unconfirmed. The pilot provides a preregistered heuristic for right‑sizing decomposition, along with an oracle, dataset, and analysis pipeline.
By Pedro Santos
arXiv:2609.36426v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: A detector pretrained on a broad corpus is fine-tuned on a narrow domain, its in-domain accuracy improves, and it ships. We ask what happens meanwhil...
By Trung Minh Bui, Jongsul Moon, YoungOuk Kim, Jung-Hoon Hwang, Dongin Shin
The paper investigates converting a large pretrained transformer (1.4 B parameters) into a smaller sibling (410 M) by studying representation alignment and parameter projection. It finds that dense weight projection destroys structure, and that a low‑budget, structure‑aware compensation—separating least‑squares function alignment from variance‑preserving rescaling—yields significant gains on token‑efficient training, outperforming subcloning and standard distillation pipelines at matched budgets.
By Ravi Satya Durga Prasad Yenugula