The paper investigates whether large language models’ reasoning traces truly contain early, informative signals or merely reflect budget and difficulty confounds. Using a restart‑controlled truncation probe, the authors compare continuation success rates against from‑scratch restart curves across 178 problem‑model pairs, finding that only one case shows prefix‑limited success and that continuing a model’s own prefix generally outperforms restarting. A difficulty‑controlled test and two generation‑free analyses reveal that early internal signals do not carry outcome information beyond a problem‑difficulty baseline, underscoring the need for proper counterfactual controls.
By Yigit Utku Bulut
arXiv:2609.38699v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: A cumulative token cap can fall inside a mathematical derivation, forcing a test-time controller to choose between stopping at the cap (strict) and all...
By Guilin Zhang, Ziqi Tan, Wulan Guo, Kai Zhao, Hongyun Yang, Mei Luo, Qi Ning, Feng Yang
The paper introduces a benchmark for evaluating whether off‑the‑shelf small language models (SLMs) can reliably perform microtasks that support a large language model (LLM) planner, such as auto‑approving shell commands, writing memory, selecting tools, and ranking past turns. Using fixed prompts and confidence‑interval‑aware eligibility thresholds, the authors test several Qwen3 models (0.6/1.7/4/8 B) in FP16 with no tuning and find that none of the 16 configurations meet the eligibility criteria. Quantization to 4‑bit precision further degrades performance, with the eligibility gap tracking model size rather than precision, and the issue persists across different models (e.g., Llama‑3.x) and prompt variations.
By Jundong Hu, Shekar Ramachandran
arXiv:2602.22453v4 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Retrieval heads, a subset of attention heads in Transformers, were studied in English, showing its crucial role in retrieving information from the...
By Shaswat Patel, Vishvesh Trivedi, Yue Han, Yihuai Hong, Eunsol Choi
arXiv:2605.29637v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Large language models often exhibit a substantial gap between their performance in English and in lower-resourced languages on equivalent knowledge...
By Debajyoti Mazumder, Divyansh Pathak, Prashant Kodali, Aditya Joshi, Akshay Agarwal, Jasabanta Patro
The paper introduces a calibrated instrument for rigorously measuring how inference optimizations—such as quantization, early‑exit, and speculative decoding—affect the output quality of large language models. It uses a formally calibrated LLM judge that verifies no systematic bias between statistically equivalent outputs and includes a null condition to ensure measured differences are zero. Applying this method, the authors find that a 4‑bit model is indistinguishable from its 16‑bit counterpart, while 3‑bit quantization and early‑exit techniques incur measurable quality losses that vary by language and task, and that token‑certainty‑based acceptance rules cannot reliably identify impactful errors.
By Jerry Kaplan