arXiv:2608. 12771v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The extent to which large language models for code rely on memorization over genuine understanding remains highly debated.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2606. 17648v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Standard accuracy metrics cannot explain why LLMs handle variable tracking but fail on semantically equivalent loops.
arXiv:2606. 05646v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have enabled powerful software engineering (SE) agents capable of navigating complex codebases and resolving real-world issues.
arXiv:2504. 04718v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent studies have demonstrated that test-time compute scaling effectively improves the performance of small language models (sLMs).
arXiv:2601. 03808v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved notable performance in code synthesis; however, data-aware augmentation remains a limiting factor, handled via heuristic design or brute-force approaches.
The paper introduces a three-level evaluation framework—behavioral deployment, LM-head readout, and probe recoverability—to distinguish whether a language model fails a syntactic test by not encoding structure or by failing to use it. Using a trilingual control-dependency benchmark, the authors find that probe recoverability consistently exceeds LM-head readout, which in turn exceeds behavioral deployment across seven models and three languages, with the largest gap observed in Qwen3-0.6B Instruct. Layer-localized activation patching shows that instruction tuning shifts the decoded layer later, suggesting decoding favors surface shortcuts and that behavioral evaluation understates what models encode while probing alone overstates what they deploy.
The paper revisits the impact of pruning on large language models (LLMs) during test-time scaling (TTS). While prior work found that structured pruning degrades reasoning performance, this study shows that unstructured pruning—removing only specific redundant weights—can actually improve TTS performance on reasoning benchmarks for models s1.1-7B and Qwen3-8B, sometimes surpassing the full-weight models. The authors also examine how different layer-wise sparsity allocation strategies affect these outcomes.