arXiv:2609.01274v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) improves language-model reasoning, but how these gains relate to inference-time decoding and sear...
By Wenhe Sun, Cunxiang Wang, Zijun Yao, Yixin Cao
arXiv:2607. 09706v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Language models turn a worded situation into a numeric plan, and the dominant pipelines (NL4Opt, OptiMUS, ORLM, OR-LLM-Agent) commit to a single objective and point-valued coefficients, then solve once.
By Suyash Mishra
arXiv:2509. 08521v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: FMT$^{*}$ plans efficiently in static worlds by expanding a cost-ordered wavefront and collision-checking lazily, but its single-pass unvisited rule cannot revise paths when obstacles change.
By Soheil Espahbodi Nia
arXiv:2607. 17240v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When does a committed intermediate stage in an LLM reasoning pipeline earn its cost?
By Honglin Li (ShanghaiTech University)
arXiv:2606. 16999v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Frozen small code models ( =45.
By Mehmet Iscan
The paper reports on a large‑scale verified search experiment using a 30B language model on a laptop, evaluating three operator packages—schematic notebooks, named obstacles, and behavioural repulsion—in a factorial design across nine construction problems. Results show that the full composition of operators closes the seed‑to‑record gap more effectively than any single component, increases construction‑hash diversity, and that memory plus repulsion consistently avoids collapse. A frontier proposer achieves similar gains in far fewer samples, but the search ultimately stalls near a plateau where the reference family is adopted and optimized only when provided as code.
By Roberto I. Ono Filho