Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across diverse tasks, from text summarization to question answering. Despite these capabilities, their black-box nature obscures internal decision-making processes. Mechanistic interpretability (MI) aims to address this by reverse-engineering neural networks into human-understandable algorithms. Current MI approaches for LLMs typically follow a two-stage paradigm: first identifying important components (circuit discovery), where components are typically individual nodes such as an attention head or feedforward neuron, and second determining the role they play in a certain task (functional interpretation). However, this sequential approach overlooks a fundamental insight: a component's importance and its functional role are inherently codependent. Unifying these stages presents two key challenges: (1) functional roles are often tied to specific nodes or components, limiting generalization, and (2) their identification relies on subjective interpretation rather than quantifiable metrics. To address these challenges, we propose S^3martCirc (Self-supervised Smart Circuit Discovery), a unified framework that simultaneously discovers circuits and interprets functionality. S^3martCirc abstracts node behavior into two general computational roles that generalize across tasks and defines a quantitative metric for assigning them, enabling importance and functional role to be discovered jointly rather than in sequence. Extensive experiments show that our framework outperforms existing methods in circuit discovery.
Wendy Zheng, Yinhan He, Liang Wu et al.· 0 citations
Long-horizon large language model (LLM) agents require context assembly: the runtime must decide what to include in each prompt, in what order, and when to compact history under a hard context-window budget and a byte-sensitive prompt cache. In production agentic systems, this logic is scattered across prompt builders, ad hoc compaction routines, cache-break workarounds, and per-provider shims. We argue that context assembly is structurally isomorphic to query execution in a relational database: both execute under a hard budget, exploit a tiered cache, and leverage statistics. We adopt this discipline in ContextPipe: a five-phase pipeline (Plan Bind Optimize Execute Feedback) backed by a structured data-source catalog, a deterministic cache-aware optimizer, and an EXPLAIN ANALYZE trace. We show that context in ContextPipe is auditable, replayable, and failure-isolated. A preliminary evaluation using the SWE-bench Pro Qutebrowser subset shows that, compared with the append-only context construction policy, ContextPipe reduces total token volume by 31%, LLM calls by 23%, and response time by 9%, at the cost of a lower KV cache-hit ratio.
Inference-time search with large language models (LLMs) often concentrates on a small set of structurally or semantically similar trajectories, leaving alternatives underexplored---a failure mode we call \textit{reasoning basin collapse}. We introduce BASIN, a training-free, structure-aware selection method that groups reasoning states into basins and penalizes repeated visits to the same strategy, thereby reallocating search across genuinely distinct reasoning paths under a fixed compute budget. Under matched inference budgets, BASIN improves over Tree of Thoughts (ToT) by up to $+22$pp on Game of 24 and $+6.7$pp on MuSR. A quality-aware variant, QA-BASIN, further improves robustness by preserving high-quality basins when unconditional diversification over-explores. To explain when basin-aware selection helps, we introduce the redundancy gap $\Delta$, which measures how differently search concentrates for correct versus incorrect predictions: standard ToT often operates near $\Delta \approx 0$, while BASIN consistently shifts $\Delta$ positive. More broadly, BASIN suggests structure-aware selection as a simple and general approach to improving inference-time reasoning. Code can be found at https://github.com/GitHubLuCheng/basin.
Recent advances in LLM agents enable a new paradigm for asset pricing, which we call Agentic Empirical Asset Pricing (AEAP): systems that autonomously conduct the scientific discovery process itself. We define AEAP and identify its core building blocks. Existing evaluation practices backtest only the outputs (factors or trades), not the autonomous discovery system that produced them. We focus on factor discovery, contributing a reference architecture, a rigorous evaluation standard for discovered factors, and a method for out-of-sample backtesting the discovery system. As a concrete instance of that architecture, we evaluate SEADS against five re-implemented baselines on two US equity panels using this standard: no single metric ranks the systems consistently, motivating evaluation on multiple axes at once. A separate rolling re-execution then asks the complementary question of whether the discovery process itself, not one static output, is reliable. We also report negative findings and limitations that surface further evaluation pitfalls for future AEAP systems.
Ying-Jian Pan, Xiao-Wei Ding, Kay Giesecke· 0 citations
Reach audiences
Advertise in front of researchers, engineers, and readers.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable promise in translating and reformulating complex mathematical optimization problems across modeling languages. However, validating such transformations through empirical solver executions alone is unreliable, as solver outcomes may be affected by local minima, structural timeouts, numerical artifacts, and subtle semantic divergence between formulations. We introduce SOVER, an LLM-assisted SMT framework that separates semantic mapping from formal certification: Z3 checks domain cross-feasibility and global objective-order preservation for mixed-integer linear formulations, while dReal provides tolerance-aware feasibility/range and $\epsilon$-argmin checks for continuous nonlinear formulations. We also introduce NLEquiv-150, a public benchmark of 100 equivalent and 50 deliberately hard non-equivalent nonlinear reformulation pairs. With LLM-extracted mappings, SOVER classifies 149/150 pairs (99.33%) correctly, including all 50 hard negatives; the sole error is an incomplete mapping extraction.
Many automobile and mobility companies deploy learned driving policies on embedded computers with limited memory and power. Pruning, knowledge distillation, and quantization are the standard methods to reduce the size and the inference cost of these policies. However, these methods are commonly assessed by aggregate numerical scores, and such scores may not reflect the ability of the policy to drive safely when interacting with other road users. In this study, we propose a stage-wise closed-loop evaluation approach to follow a driving policy through a compression pipeline. We formulate the driving task as a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) and train a belief-state policy with proximal policy optimization (PPO) in Gym-Duckietown. We then extract the actor, compress it one stage at a time, and evaluate it on five driving curricula. We show that structured pruning is the stage at which the driving capability is first lost. Meanwhile, distillation improves the pruned actor, but the improvement is limited by its rehearsal data. Integer quantization of the improved actor loses some of the curricula that require the vehicle to stop and then resume. Interestingly, the same procedure on the unpruned actor preserves all five curricula. Our study thus provides an empirical analysis aiming to answer the currently active discussions on how to accept a compressed driving policy, so as to achieve a safe and statistically reliable deployment of automated driving functions.
Ahmad Alfan Alfian Irfan, Nur Ahmad Khatim, Mansur Arief· 0 citations
Large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems (MAS) have shown strong potential for solving complex tasks, yet their development forces a tradeoff: code frameworks are expressive but engineering-intensive, while no-code builders simplify authoring but constrain agent interactions to author-defined workflows. We present ChatDev 2.0: DevAll (hereafter DevAll), a no-code platform for building, executing, and inspecting heterogeneous MAS that delivers both high expressiveness and ease of use. In terms of expressiveness, DevAll pairs a declarative executable graph abstraction with a cycle-aware execution engine, so that heterogeneous agents and dynamic and cyclic interactions can be represented and executed within a single framework. For ease of use, an integrated visual interface lets users author, run, monitor, and inspect MAS, including human-in-the-loop steps, entirely without writing code. Experiments demonstrate that DevAll reproduces state-of-the-art MAS across three representative tasks at competitive performance and without task-specific orchestration code, highlighting its effectiveness as a general-purpose platform for LLM-based MAS. DevAll is available at https://github.com/OpenBMB/ChatDev.
Yu-Fan Dang, Shunyu Yao, Bo-Wen Lai et al.· 0 citations
LLMs have been rapidly adopted across writing tasks, prompting the development of tools for detecting LLM-generated text. Yet, these tools largely measure how much of a document's surface text was written by an LLM and aren't fundamentally designed to measure how much of the information content or ideas originated from the LLM itself rather than being supplied by the user in the prompt. In this work, we design a framework that measures how much value a person adds on top of what a language model could have easily produced by itself. The method requires no training or labeled data and never scores the document's surface text, insulating it from stylistic confounders. Instead, it extracts the document's content at increasing levels of granularity, uses an LLM to reconstruct the document from each partial representation, and compares these reconstructions with those produced from the task description alone. We call this framework Value Over Language Model (VOLM), which measures a document's contribution relative to a replacement-level document that an LLM could produce from the task description alone. We evaluate VOLM with a specific instantiation of this framework across three domains: news articles, ICLR peer reviews, and argumentative essays. VOLM separates human-authored documents from matched LLM-generated documents produced from generic task descriptions, while remaining substantially invariant to content-preserving transformations, including LLM-based reconstruction and round-trip translation. We further find that increasingly constrained content extractors reduce residual differences between LLM-generated and humanized text, demonstrating the importance of disentangling informational content from stylistic variation. We hope these results encourage further work on specialized instantiations of the framework and on assessing human contributions in LLM-assisted writing more generally.
Vibhhu Sharma, Thorsten Joachims, Sarah Dean· 0 citations
Edge-AI model selection is commonly driven by one isolated metric - accuracy, latency, memory, energy, or safety, even though a deployable language model must balance all five. Our work focuses on answering the question whether na- tively trained small language models (SLMs) or large language models (LLMs) compressed through post-training quantization offer the more sustainable edge- deployment trade-off. We introduce a reproducible Holistic Sustainability Score (HSS) organized around the triple bottom line: an economic pillar for capability and systems efficiency, an environmental pillar for operational GPU energy and a social pillar for harmful-prompt robustness. Five BF16 SLMs and five LLMs under different quantization approaches - BF16, INT8, NF4 4-bit, GPTQ 4-bit, and GGUF Q4 produce 30 measured configurations. Capability is assessed on five zero-shot benchmarks; efficiency uses latency, throughput, peak VRAM and energy; and safety is approximated by attack success rate on five harmful prompts. Qwen3-30B-A3B/GGUF Q4 ranks first in the combined pool (93.38), followed by Mistral-Small-24B/GGUF Q4 (92.40), while Phi-4-mini/BF16 is the highest- ranked SLM in that pool (89.49). Thus, the hypothesis that native SLMs must be the most sustainable edge choice is not supported universally; optimized quantized LLMs can win overall, while SLMs remain competitive through lower resource demand. Quantization is a systems-level choice rather than a monotonic precision- efficiency trade-off and HSS remains relative to its comparison pool and proxy definitions.
A multi-model language service must route each request while preserving workload-level budgets for compute, latency, memory, or monetary cost. Two features make this problem materially harder than static model selection. Prompt representations are high dimensional, so only a small subset of embedding directions may predict the incremental value of a model, and both the request mix and the model frontier drift after launches, fine-tunes, quantization changes, and system updates. We formulate nonstationary sparse contextual routing with multiple knapsack constraints and an optional shadow-audit stream that evaluates a small fraction of prompts on several models. We propose Drift-Aware Sparse Routing (DRS). The policy estimates reward and resource use from a rolling audit window, routes using pessimistic reward and optimistic cost estimates, updates resource shadow prices online, and applies a hard meter before commitment. The analysis separates control from statistics. On any event with uniform prediction radii $\{\beta_t\}$, regret against a paced dynamic fluid benchmark is bounded by the sum of the radii, a capacity-buffer term, and an $O(\sqrt{T})$ pacing term. Under a sparse linear model and bounded drift $V_T$, rolling estimation gives \[ \widetilde O\left( T\sqrt{\frac{s}{\rho W}}+WV_T+\sqrt{T} \right), \] where $s$ is sparsity, $\rho$ is the audit rate, and $W$ is the window length. Optimizing $W$ yields the usual stationary $O(\sqrt{sT/\rho})$ rate when $V_T=0$ and a $O(T^{2/3}(s/\rho)^{1/3}V_T^{1/3})$ adaptation term under drift.
We describe the SciTrue team's participation in both subtasks of the NTCIR-19 SciClaimEval task~\cite{sciclaimeval}, which asks systems to verify scientific claims against the tables and figures of a paper. Rather than tuning a single model, we benchmark eleven frontier and open multimodal models under one honest, per-sample protocol and combine them with light, transparent post-processing. On the official, blind test leaderboard (Section~\ref{sec:results}), SciTrue placed first by a clear margin in three of the four evidence-category/subtask combinations, and tied for first on the primary metric in the fourth. Three findings explain the result. First, strong instruction-tuned models are already competitive: Claude Opus~4.8 and Gemma-4-31B each exceed the strongest public baseline (o4-mini), and GPT-5.5 and Claude Fable~5 lead both subtasks (97.7 on Subtask~2). Second, the task's pairing structure is the largest lever: a \emph{leak-free pair prior} that recovers the Supported/Refuted pairing from the claim text alone (a visible field) and assigns Supported to the higher-confidence evidence raises Subtask-1 pair-accuracy from 72.2 to 93.5, far more than any model swap or ensemble weighting. Third, a case-by-case audit finds that most residual errors are visually-undetectable label-mapping swaps or dataset label noise, so measured accuracy understates the true ability and the fixable-by-modeling headroom is small. Controlled fine-tuning, distillation, and agentic consistency-checking support the same conclusions, and we document throughout a measurement leak---label information reaching a system through the packaging of the data rather than its content---in which the released file ordering encodes the label, including one instance that briefly misled our own pipeline.
Qiming Bao, N. Tan, Si-Yuan Wang et al.· 0 citations
Language model agents increasingly propose actions, observe external feedback, and explain their own behavior. Their confidence and rationales are convenient oversight signals, but convenience is not verification. We introduce an environment-grounded audit in which every intermediate proposal receives an exact outcome. A language model operates an evolutionary Contexto search whosefeedback function assigns every valid guess an exact rank without human annotation. Across 200 runs spanning five configurations and three model families, four reporting configurations produce 12,249 self-reports. We test three assumptions: stated confidence is calibrated, inherited rationales affect later proposals, and outcome-based selection improves report quality. All three fail. Operators overstate top-100 success by factors of 4.8 to 9.3, while calibration and discrimination dissociate across model families. Controlled interventions on 754 inherited rationales bound any measured benefit of the genuine rationale to roughly 250 ranks. Neither fitness-based nor random selection produces a detectable selection differential or parent-to-offspring transmission in report accuracy, despite sharply different search behavior. Agent self-reports should therefore be treated as claims to verify against the environment, not as evidence of their own reliability.
Lab: Machine Intelligence and Biocomputing Lab (MIB) at School of Computing
Supervisor: Dr. Ting Hu
Supporting lab supervisor: Ryan Zhou
En-Rong Pan, Ryan Zhou, Ting Hu· Inquiry@Queen's Undergraduat...· 0 citations
