Large language models generate one token at a time, yet their responses show remarkably consistent length structure: step-by-step solutions converge in predictable token counts, retrievals stop after a few sentences, retractions extend responses by measurable amounts. We ask whether the model carries an internal estimate of how much response remains.
arXiv:2606. 11552v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks, but their autoregressive decoding process incurs substantial inference costs due to inherently sequential token generation.
By Lexington Whalen, Yuki Ito, Ryo Sakamoto
Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks, but their autoregressive decoding process incurs substantial inference costs due to inherently sequential token generation. Speculative decoding addresses this bottleneck by employing a lightweight draft model to propose multiple future tokens that are subsequently verified in parallel by a larger target model.
arXiv:2607. 29378v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) generate text by auto-regressively sampling the next token.
By Pirzada Suhail, Nagasai Saketh Naidu, Atanu R Sinha, Amit Sethi
arXiv:2607. 12279v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Writing a sentence of exactly twelve words; ending a DNA sequence at the right codon; formatting an ASCII table.
By Jacob Dunefsky, Wes Gurnee, Emmanuel Ameisen
arXiv:2607. 01792v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While decoder-only LLMs excel at a vast array of natural language tasks, it suffers from an asymmetric information flow induced by causal attention: later tokens are richer in contextual grounding than earlier ones.
By Andikawati P Widjaja, Yongjun Kim, Hyounghun Kim, Jaeho Lee