Model releases, architecture work and prompting research on large language models — from frontier-lab announcements to the arXiv papers behind them.
Translating wordplay across languages has long challenged both professional translators and machine translation systems. We investigate three approaches to translating puns from English to French by combining large language models with linguistic constraints for wordplay generation.
Existing scaling strategies for Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) typically expand either model parameters or sequential inference computation, incurring substantial memory or latency overhead. More importantly, most existing methods fail to alter the rigid, fixed computation allocation between the Vision Transformer and the Large Language Model components, limiting task-specific optimization.
Large language models (LLMs), and the agents built on top of them, are now benchmarked heavily on whether they can finish a task -- fix a bug, drive a browser, operate a GUI. A complementary social ability, namely how well a model understands and forecasts the way real social events unfold, has barely been measured.
On-policy training has emerged as a powerful post-training paradigm for improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models, and is often enhanced by golden trajectories from stronger expert models. However, when the expert fails on harder problems, existing trajectory-guided methods lose their main source of supervision, and these failed trajectories are typically discarded as negative samples.
Human input reaches language models by typing or speaking, and each channel leaves a distinct signature: orthographic noise for keyboards; for voice, disfluency from conventional transcription and restructuring from AI-backed dictation tools. How do they impact an LLM's performance?
Modern large language models - transformers and diffusion language models - are built around two canonical algorithmic tasks: prediction and generation. We prove unconditional separations between low-depth quantum computation and the corresponding bounded-resource classical language-model architectures in both regimes.
Prompt-driven vision-language models (VLMs) hold immense promise for accelerating dense remote sensing (RS) annotation, but static models suffer from severe performance degradation when deployed on novel scenes, unseen categories, or visually confusing backgrounds. Moreover, existing unified paradigms primarily rely on intra-image specific prompts, lacking flexible task routing to adapt to multi-intent operational workflows.
Vision-language models exhibit remarkable zero-shot capabilities but suffer significant performance degradation under distribution shifts. While test-time adaptation (TTA) via Low-Rank Adaptation offers a parameter-efficient solution, we identify a fundamental bottleneck in current methods: the reliance on static rank configurations.
Modern agent frameworks equip large language models with external skill libraries to solve complex tasks. However, it remains unclear whether these systems can effectively evolve their skills and whether the resulting skills improve task-solving capabilities.
An LLM-based agent is a loop that reads itself. Agentic frameworks externalize identity, memory, and disposition into editable files.
Vision-Language Models (VLMs), like Large Language Models (LLMs), may memorize sensitive, copyrighted, or harmful knowledge from their pretraining corpora. Removing such knowledge is essential for building trustworthy AI systems.
Terminal User Interfaces (TUIs) combine the stateful, screen-oriented behaviour of GUIs with terminal deployment and are now common in developer tools. Yet they lack a dedicated testing methodology.
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable performance across vision-language tasks, but their progress depends heavily on large-scale, high-quality multimodal data that are costly to annotate. Self-augmentation offers a promising alternative by enabling models to expand their own training data without external supervision.
Collective intelligence research treats disagreement as evidence of epistemic diversity: if agents express different views, the group should retain capacity to revise. In LLM collectives this proxy can break: agents can produce diverse-looking arguments while preserving the same conclusion.
In human visual perception, uppercase lettering serves as a natural salience cue that captures attention within lowercase text. In this paper, we present a systematic empirical characterization study revealing that Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit an analogous property: letter casing modulates internal attention allocation.
Causal diagnostic models must explain how conclusions follow from evidence because diagnoses guide repairs and treatments. Yet serious cases are scarce, records rarely contain reasoning paths, and data transfer poorly across configurations, complicating local deployment.
Many critical reasoning tasks, including clinical diagnosis, legal judgment, and industrial fault diagnosis, require step-dependent causal chains in which early errors propagate and correct conclusions can mask invalid reasoning. Although large language models perform well on such tasks, privacy, latency, and controllability motivate distillation into locally deployable models.
On-Policy distillation (OPD) transfers teacher capabilities by supervising student-sampled trajectories with dense token-level teacher signals. Recent selective OPD methods improve this process by prioritizing signals that are confident, informative, or learnable.
AI-assisted peer review is increasingly discussed and adopted as a tool to support the scientific publishing process, yet there is little systematic understanding of how publication venues regulate its use or of how capable current AI review systems are. We address these questions by first surveying reviewer-facing AI policies across 111 leading AI/NLP conferences and medical journals, revealing substantial regulation differences between the two communities.
Self-consistency assumes the most frequent answer among sampled reasoning traces is the most reliable, but this can fail in causal reasoning: samples often repeat the same confounding error, and votes fragment across multiple valid answers, letting an invalid answer win despite a valid minority trace. We introduce CALVER (Causal Axiom-Level VERification), a training-free symbolic verifier that scores structured traces against Pearl's causal criteria, including -separation, backdoor adjustment, and intervention, and selects the highest-scoring candidate without consulting a reference answer.