Replicating TRACE: A Practitioner's Guide to Its Threshold and Particle Budget
Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
arXiv:2610.17093v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A model diff credits post-training with whatever separates a base checkpoint from one post-trained descendant, presuming a rerun would land close by. O...
The study measured the impact of a single training example on a GPT‑2 model by running 24 counterfactual experiments. 32 models were trained from scratch on OpenWebText, and at a specific training step a single batch row was replaced with a 194‑token passage under three conditions (fluent prose, fabricated subject, random characters) or left unchanged. Results showed that the passage was learned from one exposure and decayed, with measurable differences in cross‑entropy up to 50 steps after injection but no lasting effect at the final step.
arXiv:2609.25052v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: "An agent that writes its conclusions into a store it later retrieves from closes a loop usually reported as one-way contamination. Taking the loop to...
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.
arXiv:2608. 03263v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We test whether the "compositional ignition" reported in latent-reasoning models is real computation, an instrument artifact, or inherited from verbal training data.
The paper introduces a Causal Market Simulator using a continuous‑time causal prior‑data fitted network (PFN) to estimate market impact, addressing bias from informational flow that traditional models overlook. On a synthetic market prior with adjustable confounding, the PFN matches an unbiased oracle while a naive estimator overestimates by up to 68%. In zero‑shot tests on real limit‑order books and equity data, the model’s intervention responses align with ground‑truth scales and improve correlation with measured impact when a recurrent state‑space variant is used.