arXiv AI

arXiv:2606.23571v2 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being integrated into first-principles computational workflows, yet their ability to configure scientific calculations remains poorly understood. Here, we introduce INCARBench, a benchmark for evaluating LLMs on input configuration for the Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package (VASP) through both configuration generation and repair tasks. Evaluating 19 model configurations reveals substantial capability differences among current frontier models. While several models achieve high semantic and policy accuracy, task-critical correctness remains substantially lower, demonstrating that parameter-level correctness does not necessarily imply scientifically valid configurations. Failure analysis shows that errors concentrate in physically coupled settings involving DFT+$U$, magnetism, and correlated materials, where multiple constraints must be satisfied simultaneously. Repair evaluation further reveals that correcting incorrect settings and preserving already-valid configurations are distinct capabilities, with configuration preservation remaining a major challenge. These findings establish scientific configuration as a measurable capability of large language models and provide a foundation for developing more reliable AI systems for computational materials science.

arXiv:2507.05723v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) with increasingly sophisticated natural language understanding and generative capabilities has sparked interest in the Agent-based Modelling (ABM) community. With their ability to summarize, generate, analyze, categorize, transcribe and translate text, answer questions, propose explanations, sustain dialogue, extract information from unstructured text, and perform logical reasoning and problem-solving tasks, LLMs have a good potential to contribute to the modelling process. After reviewing the current use of LLMs in ABM, this study reflects on the opportunities and challenges of the potential use of LLMs in ABM. It does so by following the modelling cycle, from problem formulation to documentation and communication of model results, and holding a critical stance.

arXiv:2610.28619v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-token prediction (MTP) can accelerate language-model decoding by drafting several tokens and verifying them in a single target-model pass. However, the best speculation horizon changes with context: longer drafts offer greater amortization when reliable, but can waste compute on suffixes discarded after a rejection. Unlike autoregressive drafting, where a stopping rule can decide token by token, MTP must fix the horizon before drafting, as all heads fire in the same forward pass. We therefore formulate horizon selection as an online control problem, using verification feedback to learn how far the draft can be trusted in each context, and introduce Adaptive Multi-Token Prediction (AMTP): a lightweight controller that requires no retraining and leaves the exact verifier unchanged. To guide horizon selection, we characterize the expected number of tokens committed at each horizon via acceptance survival, the probability that a draft prefix is fully accepted. Before each round, AMTP predicts how far the draft is likely to survive and picks the horizon with the highest expected tokens per second, learning freely from every verification pass. Theoretically, we show that any online learner's prediction error translates into throughput regret against the best horizon for each context, and in turn into a bound on wall-clock completion time. With online gradient descent, this regret is sublinear. Across five draft-target pairings built on Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct with Medusa heads, Meta's MTP models, and Qwen3-4B-Inst-2507-MTP, evaluated on AIME 2025 and GSM8K, AMTP decodes up to 4.1x faster than standard decoding and matches or outperforms the fixed window in 8 of 10 settings, with throughput gains of up to 10%.

arXiv:2610.28611v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Modern distributed microservice deployments generate massive volumes of heterogeneous, multi-format observability logs across physically and logically partitioned infrastructure. Isolating root causes during cascading failures remains an arduous task for Site Reliability Engineers (SREs), bottlenecked by manual keyword filtering and disjointed temporal correlation across monitoring dashboards. We introduce Semantic Observability, an autonomous multi-agent framework that unifies disparate log streams into a dynamic, queryable Property Graph Database. By modeling physical infrastructure topologies, logical software dependencies, and chronological event sequences as attributed nodes and directed relations, it bridges the semantic gap inherent in flat, unstructured log repositories. Building on this unified substrate, we deploy a stateful multi-agent system orchestrated through Directed Cyclic Graphs (DCGs). The system autonomously navigates the topology, applying causal graph algorithms and temporal back-traversal to isolate the precise blast radius of anomalies. The pruned subgraph is then interpreted by a Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning engine to generate contextualized, code-level Root Cause Analyses (RCA) and actionable remediations. This paper establishes the foundational system architecture, formal relational ontology, and multi-agent control loops of Semantic Observability. We show conceptually how the framework eliminates ambient telemetry noise, reduces Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR), compresses LLM token consumption, and prevents structural hallucinations. We also specify an open-source validation framework on standard benchmarks (LogHub and Train-Ticket), laying the groundwork for a forthcoming companion paper on exhaustive quantitative evaluation and production benchmarking.

arXiv:2610.28604v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Current evaluation of LLM-generated debate largely focuses on argumentative quality, leaving the value structure of generated arguments underexamined. We introduce a diagnostic metric framework for comparing how values are expressed and organized in human-reference and AI-generated debates. The framework separates value expression, the range of recognizable values a debate invokes, from value organization, how those values are distributed and sustained across turns. Grounded in Schwartz's Basic-10 value theory, it represents debates as multi-level value distributions over argumentative units, utterances, stances, and full debates, enabling metrics for value coverage, alignment, diffusion, and cross-turn dynamics. Across multiple generation systems, AI-generated debates are broadly value-expressive, often activating as many or more value dimensions than matched human references, but they organize these values differently. Their utterances are more locally value-diffuse, and source-blind judges distinguish value clarity from value focus. These findings show that debate evaluation should consider not only value presence, but also value organization. Code and supplementary materials are available at https://github.com/Maoyuan-li/Value-Expression-and-Organization.

arXiv:2610.28601v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Computer-use agents are limited by the interfaces humans give them. An agent may type a spreadsheet cell by cell when a single line of code would do, or print all two thousand lines of a file through a shell to find one function. Both the interfaces and the knowledge of when to use each are built by hand, which cannot keep pace with new applications, workflows, and models. We argue that interface design should itself be an agent capability. We introduce Agent S4, an autonomous computer-use scientist that builds Evolving Agent Interfaces from task experience. A meta-agent examines task agents' trajectories on synthetic training tasks, without success labels, and constructs and revises interfaces and usage knowledge in a repository. Population-based evolution then selects which repositories to develop further by their performance on validation tasks the meta-agent never sees, favoring changes that generalize beyond the seen tasks. On OSWorld V2, Agent S4, with Qwen3.8-27B and the evolved repository of interfaces, sets a new state of the art in open-source computer-use agents, reaching 21.3% binary score, 3.8 times the same model with fixed interfaces. This is above both GPT-5.5 (13.0%) and Claude Opus 4.8 (20.6%), at about 4.3% and 1.5% of their respective costs. On ScienceBoard, the evolved interfaces improve the success rate from 41.4% to 58.6% with the same model. These results suggest that useful interfaces can be evolved from experience, making autonomous interface design a source of improvement complementary to advances in models and harnesses. We open-source our code at https://github.com/simular-ai/agent-s.

arXiv:2610.28595v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: RTL repair benchmarks should measure whether a model can fix broken RTL given a specification. To this end, we construct and hash-bind RTLRepairDataset, 5,784 (broken, fixed) training pairs; RTLRepairBench, 459 held-out cases with 374 syntactic and 85 behavioral mutations; and an evaluation harness supporting simulation and formal equivalence. We then use this infrastructure to identify two measurement confounds. First, simulation and formal scoring give opposite signs for the apparent effect of providing a specification in one evaluated cohort; reset-aware rescoring attributes almost all of the simulation-formal disagreement to reset and first-cycle comparison semantics. Second, on 274 mined model failures, the specification-only minus specification-conditioned recovery point estimate ranges from -8.5 to +18.3 percentage points across six models. Thus, a conventional repair score need not isolate whether the model used the faulty RTL. We translate these findings into evaluation controls: report initialization, reset, first-cycle, and unknown-value semantics; disclose oracle coverage and undecided cases; and include a specification-only baseline. Together, the resources and audit provide both a benchmark for behavioral repair and a protocol for diagnosing what contributes to its measured score. We release the benchmark, the training set, construction code, sanitized aggregate evidence, and reproduction materials at https://github.com/Evaaaz/RTLRepairBench.

arXiv:2610.28584v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autoregressive models (ARMs) face a "Sequentiality Bottleneck" in reasoning, while diffusion language models (DLMs) offer parallelism but lack semantic coherence. To addresses both limitations, we propose Collaborative Reasoning Asymmetric Learning (CoRAL), a hybrid framework via an Asymmetric Planner-Executor (APE) architecture: a DLM Planner generates K diverse reasoning trajectories in parallel, while a large ARM Executor selects the optimal plan and synthesizes the final answer. To train the Planner effectively, we introduce Reward-Guided Denoising for CoT (RDC), which integrates outcome-based rewards into the diffusion process to steer it toward goal-directed reasoning. Experiments on vision-language benchmarks show that CoRAL significantly outperforms prior diffusion-based methods and achieves competitive performance against strong ARMs, achieving both superior efficiency and quality.

arXiv:2610.28578v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In this report, we introduce Sage-A1.5, a 35B Mixture-of-Experts agentic model that builds on A1 to advance long-horizon problem solving through adaptive capability composition. Compared with A1, Sage-A1.5 learns not only to solve individual tasks, but also to organize work and revise its approach during execution. Sage-A1.5 highlights three improvements: agentic orchestration, verification, and open scientific discovery. First, agentic orchestration extends single-agent execution through task delegation and parallel collaboration among subagents with isolated contexts, enabling complex tasks to be decomposed and addressed concurrently and supporting efficient execution while reducing interference across concurrent subagents. Second, agentic verification strengthens long-horizon reliability through progress checking, evidence validation, and reflective strategy revision, allowing the agent to recognize unproductive search paths and pursue alternative approaches. Third, open scientific discovery extends agentic capabilities beyond answering predefined questions to conducting exploratory research, connecting scientific inquiry with interactive analysis and inspectable research artifacts. We showcase these capabilities through complicated agentic tasks and multidisciplinary scientific applications. Besides, we hope Sage-A1.5 provides the community with an accessible foundation for open scientific discovery, offering a practical path from long-horizon task execution to collaborative, verifiable, and inspectable scientific exploration.

arXiv:2610.28568v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Generative retrieval (GR) casts search and recommendation as autoregressive generation of discrete semantic identifiers (SIDs). SID design largely determines GR quality, but its discrete, interdependent components (SID construction, collision handling, decoding, and training) cannot be optimized end-to-end with gradients and remain largely hand-designed. We introduce a framework that improves these components through LLM-driven evolutionary program search, to our knowledge the first application of this approach to GR. A locally served, open-weight 31B model mutates executable GR components, so no proprietary LLM API is used, and a 1M-parameter proxy decoder provides fast feedback in place of repeatedly training the 1B target generator. Across 21 SID programs on NQ320K, proxy and target Recall@100 show strong rank correlation (Spearman $\rho = 0.90$). Guided by this proxy, evolution improves the seed GR on NQ320K, MSMARCO300K, and a multilingual e-commerce dataset under a fixed training recipe. On NQ320K, jointly evolving SID construction and collision handling improves Recall@1 from 55.8% to 59.3% and Recall@100 from 85.8% to 90.6%. A component study shows that proxy reliability depends on what is evolved: improvements transfer reliably for the semantic index but not for the generator's training objective or the full pipeline. LLM-driven evolutionary search is thus a practical tool for GR design, provided proxy reliability is established for the chosen search space.

arXiv:2610.28562v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many scientific phenomena are best understood as outcomes of underlying optimization problems, yet automated scientific discovery has largely focused on recovering equations that describe observed input-output patterns. We introduce OptScientist, a novel automated framework for discovering compact symbolic optimization laws directly from data. OptScientist comprises (i) a model that infers symbolic optimization problems by first learning to represent data as an optimization problem and then extracting its symbolic form, and (ii) an LLM agentic system embedding the model in a discovery process that integrates theoretical priors from scientific literature, discovers candidate laws, abstracts their underlying mechanisms, and suggests new data to collect. We first evaluate OptScientist on OptFeynman, a novel benchmark of 99 physics-derived optimization problems, where OptScientist recovers ground-truth laws for over 80% of the problems and remains robust to noisy contextual information, while substantially outperforming machine-learning, symbolic, and LLM-based model-discovery baselines. On human risky choice and central-bank monetary policy, OptScientist discovers compact symbolic optimization laws that achieve held-out predictive performance competitive with leading baselines, while using few parameters and substantially fewer tokens than LLM baselines. Overall, OptScientist extends automated scientific discovery to uncovering optimization laws that generate observed phenomena, enabling automated theory building across the physical, biological, behavioral, and social sciences.

arXiv:2610.28560v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Visual anomaly detection aims to detect abnormal objects, while anomaly samples are often scarce during model training. Assembling multiple pretrained detectors can help by leveraging their transferable image scores and anomaly maps. However, most existing ensemble methods apply fixed fusion rules over saved predictions which struggle when pretrained detectors clearly disagree due to different training objectives, priors, and visual representations. To this end, we design AnomalyAgent, a post-training fusion framework for accurate visual anomaly detection. AnomalyAgent aligns heterogeneous scores and maps, summarizes score- and region-level disagreement, and treats fusion as a finite action-selection problem. It implements two types of actions: 1) score actions that determine how to fuse image-level detector confidence via consensus, robust aggregation, detector weighting, or score-map consistency; 2) map actions that fuse dense anomaly responses via consensus, detector weighting, geometric aggregation, or disagreement correction. A constrained vision-language model (VLM) is introduced to inspect high-conflict samples and select valid score action and map action to produce the final prediction. We evaluate AnomalyAgent on MVTec AD and VisA as primary benchmarks, together with seven additional public anomaly benchmarks and Real-IAD for large-scale score-level evaluation. Across these benchmarks, AnomalyAgent consistently improves over equal-weight fusion and achieves the best mean image AUROC and pixel AP among the compared fusion methods on MVTec AD and VisA, while demonstrating robust transfer across additional anomaly domains.

arXiv:2610.28539v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: How can we effectively oversee AI systems that surpass human intelligence? AI Safety via Debate proposes that two AI systems argue opposing positions and a judge, either a human or a weaker model, decides which is correct. By facilitating supervisors in providing high-quality training signals, debate aims to encourage truthful and safe behavior from AI systems whose capabilities exceed our own. However, human judgment is not neutral: people often rely on biases which advanced AI systems may learn to exploit. Drawing on insights from collective intelligence and social cognition, this paper investigates whether debate can guide human and LLM supervisors toward the truth despite their prior beliefs. We evaluate several protocol configurations. We also explore setups inspired by the wisdom of the crowd such as the number and diversity of judges, as well as interaction mechanisms including deliberation and voting. Overall, we find that debate increases accuracy relative to prior beliefs for human judges, whereas the consultancy baseline, in which a single expert argues for one answer, does not. For weaker language models, however, the results are mixed: debate provides no comparable gains in most settings and can even reduce accuracy. Among multi-judge protocols, weighted voting produces the highest accuracy for human supervisors, whereas for LLMs none of them significantly improves group accuracy, even as the number of judges increases. Notably, the behavior of minority judges in non-diverse deliberation protocols suggests that, under symmetric settings, incorrect positions could be more persuasive than correct ones. These findings support debate as a viable path toward scalable human oversight, but cast doubt on its benefits for weaker AI supervisors, raising concerns about fully automated training and control pipelines in high-stakes settings.

arXiv:2610.28537v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-training quantization (PTQ) compresses the weights of a trained model with limited compute and data. Down to 4 bits it is near-lossless, but at 2 bits scalar PTQ configurations fall to chance-level accuracy. We study three choices usually treated as implementation details that matter little at 4 bits but decide 2-bit quality: the quantization representation, the calibration data, and the recovery fine-tuning data, across six dense and mixture-of experts models (ranging from $3.8$ to $32$B parameters). Representation is the largest factor and vector codebooks restore usable models where scalar PTQ pipelines collapse. Most of the remaining loss in accuracy is on \emph{generative} tasks, and the amount of performance drop is model-dependent. Furthermore, at a short recovery budget, calibration and recovery data are coupled. The best recovery data depends on the calibration data, so the two must be chosen jointly. The resulting recipe involves a vector codebook representation, a small task-aligned calibration mixture, and an inexpensive codebook-only recovery stage. Including codebooks, it uses about $2.3$ effective bits per weight and retains $89$ to $97\%$ of full-precision question-answering (QA) accuracy where scalar PTQ is at chance, and, including recovery, uses $1.4$ to $30\times$ less compute than the strongest quantization-aware-training (QAT) baseline.

arXiv:2610.28522v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Decision models support routing, guardrails, and output verification in LLM systems. However, item accuracy alone cannot establish whether models make correct decisions across controlled variations or assign reliable confidence to their predictions. We introduce DecisionPivot, a diagnostic benchmark comprising 48 tasks and 40,033 items across seven decision roles. Its core track contains 7,800 items from 13 generated task families, organized into contrast groups with computed answers verified by independently implemented solvers. The complementary reference track contains 32,233 items from 35 public test sets, preserving their original evaluation metrics. We evaluate 40 decision models and 14 general models using documented, model-specific protocols, assessing item and contrast-group accuracy, probability ordering, calibration, and empirical selective coverage. Our results reveal substantial differences obscured by aggregate scores: two 27B models separated by only 2.6 points on the reference track achieve contrast-group accuracies of 70.1% and 44.2%. Across 2,400 binary contrast pairs, Perplexity Decider correctly ranks the positive member above the negative member in 92.3% of pairs but answers both members correctly in only 74.1%, exposing a gap between probability ordering and decision correctness. Models with similar item accuracy also differ in the reliability of their high-confidence predictions. On a separate 1,296-item subset, GLM-5.3 achieves 93.5\% contrast-group accuracy at a higher reasoning setting, compared with 81.5% at its lowest effort. By linking errors to pivotal details and difficulty levels, DecisionPivot provides fine-grained diagnostics of decision failures that aggregate evaluation alone cannot reveal.

arXiv:2610.28484v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents increasingly act on behalf of people or other agents, purchasing services, exchanging information and delegating work. What an agent must respect is written in instructions, policies or agreements, but text alone cannot make it comply. It may make mistakes, be redirected by what it reads, or pursue different interests. For an economy of such agents to function, parties need agreements they can rely on without inspecting or trusting one another's agents. We introduce Proof-Carrying Contracts (PC2), a framework for making agreed constraints enforceable throughout an agent's interactions with a system. Before a requested operation can run, the agent must supply a machine-checkable proof that it preserves the agreed constraints in every case allowed by its model. An execution system called the Airlock checks the proof and controls access to the operation. The parties specify the conditions to preserve, while the agent supplies the reasoning needed to justify its decisions and remains free to adapt its strategy. This avoids having to design a separate permission policy and prove that every decision it permits is safe. We prove that the constraints hold at every instant during execution, even for an adversarial agent, and identify when this implies safety in the world. Reusable capability modules provide tools and guarantees from which contracts can be constructed. PC2 provides a foundation for an agent economy whose agreements protect both those delegating work and those carrying it out.

arXiv:2610.28483v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Learning latent dynamics is fundamental to building action-conditioned world models for planning. Among existing families, Joint Embedding Predictive Architectures (JEPAs) offer a natural framework by modeling transitions directly in latent space rather than at the pixel level. However, two issues remain in JEPA-based world models: (i) physical grounding lacks explicit aggregation of temporal context and (ii) action planning always overly relies on generic sampling distributions. To this end, we propose $\mathcal{G}$-JEPA, which incorporates temporal context into physical grounding for latent world models and couples the learned models with prior-guided action planning. Specifically, during learning, we incorporate a shared causal temporal module that aggregates temporal context within observation and prediction sequences under physical state supervision, grounding both in task-relevant physical states. When planning, we further introduce action inference through stepwise conditioning of a generative action distribution on the current and goal latent representations together with their evolving discrepancy, yielding anchored proposals that guide model-based online refinement. Together, physical state supervision guides temporal representation learning, while the action prior guides search through the learned world model. Experiments demonstrate improved planning performance on manipulation tasks, including tasks with increasing temporal separation between initial and goal observations. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/myl11045/G-JEPA.

arXiv:2610.28479v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a language model develops capabilities not traceable to its individual components, when a multi-agent AI system outperforms each agent on its own, or when a human-AI pair succeeds where either fails in isolation, AI researchers describe it as a case of ``synergy'' or ``emergence''. However, these are usually informal assessments not supported by a theoretical framework, making these claims impossible to compare or even meaningfully dispute. Here we argue that \emph{information decomposition can serve as a unifying formal framework to operationalize assessments about synergy in AI systems}. Information decomposition provides a way to distinguish qualitatively different \emph{types} of information, including unique information available from individual components, redundant information shared across multiple components, and synergistic information accessible only from parts taken together. This gives claims of emergence a precise, falsifiable criterion: a system's behavior is emergent only if it carries synergistic information about task-relevant outcomes. We apply this lens to attention heads, autonomous agents, and human-AI teams, showing how it organizes existing knowledge across scales and substrates, while also generating cross-level conjectures that siloed fields would miss.

arXiv:2610.28467v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human mobility data are fundamental to Web-based location services and broader urban applications, and mobility generation provides synthetic trajectories when real data are costly or inaccessible. Although recent mobility generators have incorporated collective mobility patterns, they primarily focus on individual trajectories and aggregate population dynamics, leaving evolving community structures formed by user-location interactions insufficiently modeled. In this paper, we study community-consistent human mobility generation. To this end, we formulate mobility generation as the generation of dynamic user-location graphs to model community structures and propose MOTION, a Multi-agent framework for cOmmuniTy-consIstent human mObility geNeration. MOTION consists of user agents, location agents, and a global manager agent. MOTION first detects coherent communities from historical mobility using the Leiden algorithm and extracts community-conditioned interaction priors to guide the generation process. Guided by these priors, the user agents plan mobility, search destination candidates, and infer user movements from the individual view. In parallel, selectively activated location agents infer likely user arrivals from the community view. The manager coordinates both views, diagnoses interactions causing deviations, and attributes targeted reflection signals to revise user decisions, location attraction, and source-user selection. Experiments on two real-world datasets show that MOTION outperforms baselines by at least 4.05% across reported metrics of individual trajectories, population and flow distributions, and community and graph structures. Further analyses confirm its robustness, privacy preservation, and downstream utility. The code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/MOTION-04C4.

arXiv:2610.28454v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agents are starting to sell to other agents. Seller agents write the listings of tools, services and products, and buyer agents read these listings when they choose what to use. We show that seller agents told only to be selected more often practice generative engine optimization on their own, and that this distorts the market for sellers and for buyers. We build tool markets from real data tools on Amazon and Instagram and run every tool on every question, so we know which tools can answer each question. Under all five production models we test, sellers rewrite their descriptions to claim more and more fields, including fields that their tools return for fewer than half of the targets. We call this process toolflation. Nothing in the market limits it, and how far it goes depends on the model, as the number of claims that contradict the sellers' own evidence differs by an order of magnitude between models. Toolflation shifts the buyers' choices between sellers, and the most capable tool loses share in seven of the ten combinations of seller model and platform. Under four models, the choices stay with capable tools and buyer agents keep their task success. Under the fifth, sellers copy one another until the descriptions no longer tell the tools apart. Buyer agents then pick tools by their position in the list, tools that answer almost nothing win a quarter to two fifths of the choices, and task success falls from 89% to about 30% on Amazon, close to random choice, and from 77% to 40% on Instagram. The sellers did only what their vendors asked, and the cost fell on buyers they never dealt with. We therefore argue that honesty toward third parties under competition is part of safety alignment, and that models should be tested as sellers before they are deployed as sellers.