LLM 理论进展

Language agents, i.e., LLM agents, progress rapidly and are increasingly deployed in production environments. This trend underscores the urgent need for rigorous and realistic evaluations. However, most existing benchmarks evaluate agents in simplified, idealized settings. They typically rely on pre-packaged tool interfaces, overlook critical steps, and assume inputs are clean and fully specified. Consequently, they understate the difficulty of real deployments, where uncertainty and noise are ubiquitous and agents must proactively explore the environment to uncover new tools. To bridge this gap, we present AgentGym2, a new evaluation framework with task instances grounded in real-world end-to-end working demands. Beyond reasoning and planning, it measures agents' ability to execute end-to-end procedures, discover tools via exploration, compose tools for unseen tasks, and remain robust to noisy and underspecified information. Experiments on 15 proprietary and open-source models show that even SOTA systems like Gemini and GPT-5 struggle on AgentGym2, revealing a substantial gap between the capability of current agents and the demands of real-world applications.

Large language model (LLM) tutors often produce fluent step-by-step explanations, but a correct and pedagogically formatted response does not guarantee that the answer was derived from the student-facing problem. In realistic tutoring systems, the model may also have access to teacher notes, answer keys, rubrics, or retrieved solution artifacts. We study whether such private answer information can make tutor explanations answer-driven: the final answer is behaviorally available before the written explanation has justified it. Using Truncated Reasoning AUC Evaluation (TRACE), which probes how early a chain-of-thought prefix can pass a verifier, we evaluate 1000 GSM8K test problems under three paired tutoring contexts: question-only, correct answer-key, and wrong answer-key. At fixed fractions of each generated explanation, we force the model to answer immediately and verify the response against the gold numeric answer. With Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct, answer-key access raises median TRACE AUC from 0.375 to 0.900 and makes the gold answer available at the first 10% prefix in 997 of 1000 cases. The effect remains strong on the 746 examples where both question-only and answer-key explanations end with the correct answer. These results support truncated CoT auditing as a lightweight process-level diagnostic for answer-driven reasoning in math tutoring explanations.

Large language models (LLMs) generate fluent outputs that can be wrong. Unlike humans, who often exhibit cues when providing false information, LLMs produce errors that are difficult to detect because autoregressive decoding provides no mechanism for verifying intermediate reasoning before state progression. We introduce Heaviside Continuity of Rolling Coefficients (HCRC), a verification-first execution framework that reformulates inference as predicate-gated state transitions governed by a Heaviside Gate. HCRC combines model confidence with independent verification signals from a parallel worker architecture, allowing execution to advance only when predefined correctness predicates are satisfied. This prevents invalid intermediate states from propagating, reducing epistemic entropy without modifying the underlying model. We evaluate HCRC on software-engineering and reasoning tasks across thirteen proposers from four providers. On capable proposers, the gate reduces the false-completion rate (FCR) from 4--7% to 0% while remaining latency-competitive and, in some settings, faster than the unwrapped model. On weaker proposers, it converts false completions into honest halts instead of corrupting downstream state. Beyond benchmarking, HCRC has operated for months as the production control plane of an agentic coding environment, authorizing file mutations, verification-driven progress reporting, and memory compaction. These results establish HCRC as a general framework for verification-driven LLM execution, showing that reliable reasoning can be achieved through principled execution control rather than model scale alone.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in software engineering workflows to generate both source code and test suites. This dual capability has enabled emerging development paradigms, including test-first and agentic workflows, where a single model is producing and validating implementations. However, these approaches assume that generated tests act as independent and reliable oracles - a fundamental requirement for effective software testing. In this paper, we challenge this assumption and investigate whether LLM-generated code biases the generation of subsequent tests. We introduce and empirically study the phenomenon of error propagation, where faults in generated code are systematically replicated in associated test artifacts. This leads to cases where incorrect implementations and tests are mutually consistent, masking defects rather than revealing them. We evaluate this effect across a range of programming tasks and agentic workflows, analyzing the consistency between generated code and test assertions, with particular focus on scenarios of aligned failures. Our study examines (i) whether erroneous code artifacts bias test generation, (ii) whether such bias persists under different prompting strategies, including chain-of-thought reasoning, and (iii) how errors propagate across multi-step workflows in which intermediate outputs are reused as context. The results show that error propagation is prevalent and impactful: generating tests after faulty code significantly reduces fault detection effectiveness compared to generating tests independently (14% vs. 25%). These findings highlight a fundamental limitation of current workflows, where lack of independence between generated artifacts undermines the reliability of automated testing. Furthermore, our results expose a previously underexplored threat to validity in empirical studies relying on coupled generation pipelines.

Autoregressive (AR) text-to-speech (TTS) models generate discrete speech tokens sequentially, which makes inference slow and can degrade robustness by propagating local errors and hallucinations. This limitation stems from their left-to-right AR commitment: each token must be determined before future speech-token context is available. However, such ordering is not an inherent requirement for TTS, as the full input text is available before synthesis. In this paper, we introduce DELTA-TTS, a lightweight LoRA-based adaptation framework that converts a pretrained AR TTS model into a discrete diffusion language model (dLLM) for confidence-ordered speech-token decoding. To better capture the local structure of speech, DELTA-TTS incorporates a convolution module that injects local acoustic context, together with a $1/t$-weighted training objective and a time-shifted inference schedule that defer low-confidence positions to later steps. Trained on only $585$ hours of LibriTTS, DELTA-TTS achieves a $1.75%$ WER on Seed-TTS test-en, outperforming its AR backbone while generating tokens $3.3\times$ faster. Further analysis shows that DELTA-TTS produces sharper text--speech alignment, increases overall decoding confidence, and mitigates hallucinations observed in AR generation.

Recent NVFP4 pretraining methods mainly target transformer linear layers, leaving optimizer states, optimizer arithmetic and attention underexplored in 4-bit pipelines. This critical gap blocks stable full-stack 4-bit pretraining, as the three core modules exhibit unique numerical failure patterns: linear layers hit hard quantization noise limits with dimension-propagated error amplification; AdamW second moments are heavy-tailed non-negative values fragile to low-precision denominators; attention carries error-prone computation paths demanding strict forward-backward quantization consistency. We propose Full-Stack FP4, the first complete NVFP4 pretraining framework resolving all three stability bottlenecks via module-wise precision strategies. For linear projections, LoRA-SVD lightweight decomposition suppresses quantization noise and breaks the direct-quantization error ceiling, shrinking the linear-only loss gap from 1.40% to 0.61%. For optimizers, we design AdamW second-moment transformation for robust NVFP4 storage and fully support native NVFP4 Newton-Schulz iterations for the Root (Muon) optimizer. For attention, a mixed-precision scheme quantizes Q/K/V and backward dS while guarding vulnerable paths in BF16, paired with unified tensor reuse to sustain forward-backward alignment. We further analyze fast error accumulation in naive low-bit matrix multiplication and the extreme sensitivity of PV / dOV^T attention branches. All modules are plug-and-play with cumulative stability and efficiency improvements. Our 3B/64B-token pretraining validates near-BF16 performance with merely 1.47% loss gap, verifying feasible stable end-to-end NVFP4 LLM pretraining.

Large language models have made research ideation increasingly accessible, yet effective idea development requires more than generating candidate directions. Researchers must ground a problem in current literature, identify meaningful bottlenecks, differentiate from existing solutions, and evaluate risks before committing to implementation. We present ResearchStudio-Idea as a reusable skill suite for this first mile of research ideation. The suite includes Paper-Search, a standalone multi-source literature search skill; Scoop-Check, a standalone prior-art collision checker for novelty claims; and IdeaSpark, the end-to-end skill that composes evidence grounding, pattern-guided generation, collision retrieval, audit, and idea-card rendering into one workflow. IdeaSpark is constructed from a corpus of 1,947 machine learning conference papers collected from ICLR, ICML, and NeurIPS between 2021 and 2025, including Oral papers, a separately tracked high-citation subset, and rejected submissions. Analysis of these outcomes reveals 31 recurring ideation sub-patterns, consolidated into 15 reusable ideation patterns. Each pattern is operationalized as a structured card containing research contexts, bottleneck types, differentiation strategies, supporting precedents, and common failure modes. Given a research problem and an evidence bundle, IdeaSpark evaluates evidence readiness, reconstructs the surrounding research context, identifies unresolved bottlenecks, selects relevant patterns, instantiates one candidate direction, retrieves potentially conflicting prior work, and performs outcome-informed auditing. This workflow transforms reusable ideation patterns into traceable research proposals. Blind automated-judge evaluations show that IdeaSpark consistently produces stronger research proposals than no-skill and generic-skill baselines while maintaining competitive novelty.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are proposed as control interfaces for next-generation networks, but their latency, hallucinations, and lack of control guarantees make them unsuitable for near-real-time packet schedulers, especially in dynamic V2X environments. This paper introduces Agentic-V2X, an architecture where a small, locally deployed language model acts as a periodic non-real-time rApp-inspired policy creator, while a lightweight xApp-like controller executes validated policies at intervals suitable for scheduling. The framework targets deadline-aware 5G NR V2X scheduling with heterogeneous services (teleoperated driving, cooperative awareness, HD map sharing, and sensor sharing). Given a scenario summary, service objective, and telemetry, the LLM generates a structured policy containing service priorities, weight bounds, and safety constraints. A validator checks and repairs the policy before the controller enforces it via scheduler-weight adaptation in ns-3/ns3-ai. The evaluation compares proportional fair scheduling, static expert policies, a heuristic xApp, static LLM policies, and adaptive LLM-rApp policies over 126 completed runs. Metrics include deadline-constrained packet reception ratio, tail latency, deadline violations, throughput, fairness, policy validity, and safety interventions. Results show that the adaptive LLM-rApp/xApp design generates valid and executable policies and remains competitive at several operating points, including improved mean critical reliability over PF at the highest density. However, paired statistical analysis shows that the adaptive method is not the best aggregate method and remains below the strongest static policies overall. These results support Agentic-V2X as a safe, executable small-LLM policy-generation architecture rather than a universally dominant scheduler.

Large language models are increasingly used as evolutionary engines for scientific discovery: generate candidates, select winners, feed them back as parents, and repeat. We audit whether this loop actually compounds discovery in scientific equation discovery, a setting where finite samples make structure underdetermined and interpolation easy. Under matched LLM-call budgets, parent-conditioned evolution is indistinguishable from fresh independent sampling: median OOD NMSE is 0.045 vs. 0.049, instructed multi-parent crossover is worse, final success is predicted by initial proposal quality, and multiple iteration schemes fail to add solved problems. Operationally, the loop reduces to what it produces: a dictionary of candidate terms. We turn that diagnosis into PTB-Search, a one-generation method for componentized scientific discovery. PTB-Search samples independent LLM proposals once, extracts reusable terms into a per-problem dictionary, and performs train-only set-level sparse selection with least-squares coefficients. Its central principle is that underdetermined data identifies the joint behavior of term sets, not reliable per-term credit. On identical dictionaries and zero additional LLM calls, set-level selectors solve 165--169 of 717 cells, while single-term reductions solve only 74--78. On the official 239-problem LLM-SRBench split, PTB-Search reaches 73.2% Acc0.1 with Llama-3.1-8B and 77.0% with a single-seed DeepSeek-V4 anchor, versus 49.2% for the best reported baseline, using one tenth of the standardized call budget. A program-domain stress test gives a scoped boundary: generation count remains unreliable, while retained external state can help in harder non-linear spaces. Across these results, LLMs are best understood as material suppliers; discovery is carried by external set-level selection over reusable components.

How concepts are represented in neural networks is a fundamental question in machine learning. The dominant view treats concept representations as stationary geometric objects. Yet concepts appear in context, and context transforms them. Drawing from neural population geometry, we formalize concept representations as point-cloud manifolds and contextual transformations as vector fields, and instantiate this framework in large language models. Across six model families of varying scales, we find that context moves each concept differently. The variance in these displacements is semantically organized, correlating with lexical concreteness and density. Importantly, both the concepts being transformed and this variance structure are shared across models: displacement structure transported from one model predicts held-out displacements in others significantly above chance. Together, these findings show that models share a common geometry not only in how concepts are represented, but more importantly in how context transforms them, a structure with richer organization than prior work has recognized.

The pursuit of self-evolving AI raises a critical question: when is autonomous self-improvement sustainable rather than degenerative? Drawing an analogy to von Neumann's complexity threshold for self-reproducing automata, we argue that sustainable recursive self-improvement in Large Language Models (LLMs) requires a functional analogue: introspection — the system's capacity to simulate its own operations and target modifications. Grounded in Kleene's Second Recursion Theorem, we demonstrate the theoretical existence of such introspective programs. However, an empirical review reveals that while current LLMs exhibit quasi-introspection (e.g., partial metacognition), they fall short of true introspection due to structural bottlenecks: a lack of complete self-access, the feedforward nature of the Transformer, and computational class constraints that prevent fixed-point iteration. We conclude by outlining architectural paths to cross this complexity threshold and discussing the associated safety implications.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in question answering (QA) systems, yet they may generate hallucinated or misaligned responses without reliable confidence estimates. Uncertainty quantification (UQ) offers a natural basis for selective answering, where a system answers only when its prediction is deemed reliable and abstains otherwise. However, existing uncertainty scores for LLMs are often heuristic: a threshold chosen on such scores does not, by itself, provide statistical guarantees on the error rate among accepted answers. We propose CIC, a confidence-interval-based calibration framework that converts arbitrary uncertainty scores into risk-controlled selective answering rules. Given a held-out calibration set, CIC evaluates each generated response using an application-specific alignment criterion and associates it with an uncertainty score and a binary error label. For each candidate uncertainty threshold, CIC estimates the acceptance-conditioned error rate and constructs a high-probability upper confidence bound using either Hoeffding-style or Clopper-Pearson confidence intervals. It then selects the largest threshold whose upper bound is below a user-specified risk level $α$, thereby maximizing the answering rate subject to a finite-sample reliability constraint. Under exchangeability, CIC guarantees with probability at least $1-δ$ that the selected threshold, if non-null, controls the error rate among accepted answers at level $α$. We evaluate CIC on both closed-ended and open-ended QA benchmarks across seven LLMs and multiple uncertainty estimators. Experimental results show that CIC consistently achieves valid risk control while retaining strong answering efficiency, providing a practical and statistically grounded mechanism for deploying LLMs in reliability-sensitive QA workflows.

Interpretability methods aim to reveal the features represented inside large language models (LLMs). Many existing methods begin with labeled examples of a human-defined concept that may reflect human biases, and then identify how that concept is represented within the model, for example in its activation space or through other decomposition methods. We introduce Mining via Activation Geometry (MAG), a simple unsupervised framework for extracting reasoning features from model activations by prepending the same natural-language instruction $Q$ to every input $p$, where $Q$ defines the reasoning feature of interest, such as ``Can this object be found in the desert?'' or ``Is this prompt malicious?'' We measure how the instruction changes the model's internal representation using $m(Q \mid p) - m(p)$ at a single readout point. We explore eight different MAGs. The extracted reasoning features predict the models' own world understanding and judgment, can be approximated into a single activation direction, we found that some features are more linearly represented and some less, this linear representation, which is vector steering, can change the LLMs' decisions through activation steering by injecting reasoning features. Finally, we use the same method to select the best training datasets for prompt-injection classifier probes: while similarity between ordinary activations is almost unrelated to downstream performance, RFD-based similarity achieves $94.7%$ Top-1 and $100%$ Top-2 accuracy.

In-context learning (ICL) has emerged as a central capability of pretrained language models, yet its theoretical analysis has focused primarily on causal language models trained by left-to-right autoregressive prediction, such as GPT-style models. Masked language models instead recover masked tokens from bidirectional context, and their role in ICL remains less understood. We develop a statistical learning framework that represents the context examples by their empirical measure and models prediction as a function of the context and the query. This formulation places autoregressive and masked pretraining objectives within a common excess-risk analysis. Under Wasserstein-type regularity conditions, we relate pretraining with T tasks and N samples per task to k-shot excess risk at inference, obtaining same-order upper bounds for masked and autoregressive objectives. We also study task-distribution shift, where pretraining tasks are sampled from P and inference tasks from Q; the resulting bound contains an additional term controlled by the lifted Wasserstein distance between P and Q. The bounds further imply an order-optimal allocation under a fixed pretraining data budget and refined rates under intrinsic low-dimensional structure. Experiments on controlled function-learning tasks show that the Masked Pair Encoder (MPE) can achieve performance comparable to GPT-2-style causal Transformers, suggesting that ICL behavior is not specific to causal language models.

Diffusion large language models (dLLMs) commit multiple tokens per denoising step by decoding each selected position independently from the shared context; when those positions are dependent, the resulting factorization error is captured by conditional total correlation, which confidence-based selection cannot observe from marginals alone. We propose CoCommit, a marker-gated coordination pass that briefly defers commitment: after the usual bundle selection, a learned marker announces the commit set and the backbone's last-$n$ layers are re-applied so marked positions coordinate — approximating joint-mode decoding — before greedy argmax writes tokens. The method reuses existing weights with one extra partial forward pass and no auxiliary model. On LLaDA2.1-mini with LoRA adapters and matched greedy inference, joint commitment improves accuracy on all six benchmarks we evaluate, with the largest gains on reasoning and exact-answer tasks.

Low-dimensional projections support interactive visual analysis of high-dimensional data embeddings, but their structure often does not align with analyst-defined semantic relationships. Recent LLM-augmented semantic steering methods address this gap by externalizing analyst intent from user-defined groups of seed examples, but they propagate intent through per-item LLM reasoning, causing LLM calls and cost to grow linearly with collection size. We propose a scalable semantic steering method that shifts semantic computation from individual items to user-defined groups. A single LLM call generates structured profiles for all groups, which are embedded and combined with seed centroids to form hybrid semantic prototypes. The method then propagates intent without retraining, using embedding-space soft assignment, abstention, and alignment-scaled updates before reprojection. On a 5K-document LitCovid corpus, our method achieves global alignment comparable to per-item LLM steering while reducing LLM calls by over three orders of magnitude. An image case study shows that the same prototype-based mechanism extends to multimodal embeddings. These results suggest that group-level representations can make semantic steering more practical for larger embedding collections.

Understanding why discovered scenarios become critical in scenario-based testing is essential for effectively leveraging them in decision-making systems. Reasoning about such criticality can be formulated as an attribution problem. However, across different decision-making tasks, the causes of criticality may involve diverse state variables, interaction patterns, and failure mechanisms, making attribution an inherently open-ended problem beyond predefined explanation spaces. Existing attribution methods still struggle to balance open-ended reasoning flexibility with the interpretability and traceability required for critical scenario reasoning. To address this limitation, we propose NeSy-CSA, a neuro-symbolic framework that transforms open-ended critical scenario attribution from unconstrained explanation generation into structured and traceable reasoning. NeSy-CSA narrows the attribution space by selecting relevant factors, makes the reasoning process traceable through a dependency-aware evidence graph, and executes symbolic reasoning procedures derived from atomic operations, coordinated with evidence-constrained neural inference to support flexible open-ended attribution. We further introduce a process-level and result-level assessment module to evaluate the structural validity of the attribution process and the behavioral effectiveness of the attribution results under controlled interventions. Experiments across four decision-making environments show that NeSy-CSA improves two intervention-based measures of attribution effectiveness by 18.32% and 13.67% over LLM-based baselines. These results demonstrate its potential to transform discovered critical scenarios into reusable knowledge for subsequent testing and safety analysis.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) generate responses autoregressively, integrating visual and linguistic information in an evolving context. Prior work on interpretability has focused on individual layers and circuits (where), leaving the token-level dynamics of multimodal computation during generation (when) underexplored. We address this gap and study attention shifts as per semantic role; tracking model attention to image, text, instruction, and previously generated tokens, One Token at a Time (OTaT). We introduce multimodal tasks that require explicit switching between visual and textual context within a single response. Across two mainstream model families and four open-weight MLLMs of varying sizes, we establish consistent patterns: attention to image peaks at tokens requiring image-derived information, instruction tokens are revisited during task transitions, and attention to previously generated tokens increases as the generation progresses. Causal attention blocking interventions validate the functional role of these trends. We profile model behavior under disrupted attention and observe responses falling back to language priors, or exhibiting cross-modal leakage, denial, or recovery. Finally, informed of the attention dynamics through our novel analysis, we propose a simple test-time intervention to boost attention to the relevant modality at the right time, significantly improving multimodal task performance.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to port scientific codes across heterogeneous high-performance computing (HPC) programming models, such as translating CUDA to OpenMP, OpenACC, Kokkos or SYCL. However, current evaluations use compilation success, token-level similarity, or developer-written tests from static benchmarks, which cannot reliably ensure behavioral correctness. We present Kaizen, a metamorphic fuzzing and differential testing framework for evaluating the correctness of LLM-translated HPC code. Kaizen uses metamorphic fuzzing via source-code mutation to generate semantically equivalent programs, grammar-based input fuzzing to explore behavioral diversity, and differential testing to expose semantic divergences between original and translated applications that compile and pass developer-written tests yet produce incorrect scientific results. We evaluate Kaizen on CUDA-to-OpenMP translation of 16 scientific applications from seven domains using three fine-tuned LLMs at kernel-level and full-program granularity. Our evaluation reveals that (1) compilation success is a poor proxy for correctness; (2) LLM-translated programs exhibit systematic compile-time error patterns, with nine categories for kernel-level translation and 27 for full-program translation; (3) semantic errors that survive compilation are often input-dependent and require differential testing to expose; and (4) full-program translation is substantially harder than kernel-level translation. These findings highlight the need for correctness-oriented evaluation of LLM-assisted HPC code translations.

Accurately modeling biomolecular interactions is a central bottleneck in biology and therapeutic discovery. Here, we introduce Open Drug Discovery Engine (OpenDDE), an open-source, all-atom biomolecular foundation model that uses co-folding as the entry point to a scalable AI-driven drug discovery engine. Rather than treating structure prediction as an isolated endpoint, OpenDDE is designed as a shared structural reasoning layer for modeling sequence-structure-function relationships across biomolecular complexes, enabling complex structure prediction today while providing a foundation for de novo design, affinity estimation, structure-conditioned optimization, and more. OpenDDE integrates advances in all-atom architecture, atomic latent reasoning, inference optimization, and large-scale data processing to achieve IsoDDE-level co-folding accuracy within a reproducible and openly accessible framework. We also identify two scaling-law directions for co-folding models, revealing practical routes for continued improvement through data, model, inference, and training scaling. By releasing training code, inference pipelines, checkpoints, and benchmarks, OpenDDE aims to democratize access to frontier biomolecular intelligence, accelerate global collaboration, and lay an open foundation for next-generation drug discovery systems that can move from predicting molecular structures toward designing, scoring, and optimizing therapeutic candidates for human health.

Ask a large language model (LLM) whether a pointer dereference is safe, and it can often produce a plausible justification for ``yes''. The difficulty is that a fluent justification is not a proof. This gap is precisely where automated vulnerability detection lives: deciding, for a given operation in source code, whether a memory safety defect such as a null dereference, use-after-free, or double free can actually occur. We trace the unreliability of LLM-based vulnerability detection to a mechanism, the premature discharge of safety obligations, and argue that the remedy is not better prompting but a separation of roles: the component that interprets the code must not also be the one that decides a safety obligation is met. In this paper, we present LeanGuard, a neuro-symbolic framework that assigns each act to the side equipped for it. On the neural side, an LLM serves strictly as a semantic filter over candidate facts extracted from the abstract syntax tree (AST): it prunes spurious facts and keeps the real ones, but never discharges an obligation or decides the verdict on its own. On the symbolic side, the surviving facts are compiled into a verification model in Lean 4 (a formal proof assistant whose kernel accepts a conclusion only when it is formally proved), where every dangerous operation must be matched by a guard that provably covers it in scope; absent such a guard, the obligation stays open rather than being argued away. Because a function rarely arrives with full context, this symbolic model is necessarily partial: an unproved obligation is not yet a defect. An evidence-aware adjudicator therefore weighs the symbolic and neural verdicts by the quality of each. We instantiate the framework on five CWE classes to ask how far this division of labor can be pushed.

Validating automotive software systems produces large multivariate test recordings that are still examined through effort-intensive manual review and rule-based evaluation, which detects faults beyond predefined rules poorly. Machine and deep learning have advanced fault diagnosis, yet most supervised models require large labelled datasets, generalise poorly to unseen conditions, and offer little insight into their decisions. We propose a generalisable and explainable two-phase framework for fault detection and classification during real-time validation. A denoising autoencoder trained only on healthy signals first flags abnormal behaviour through reconstruction-error analysis, removing the need for fault labels. Each abnormal window is then encoded as compact textual statistical evidence relative to a time-aligned healthy reference and classified by a frozen large language model under zero-shot and few-shot prompting, returning the predicted class, ranked alternatives, a confidence value, the fault location, and a short evidence-based explanation. Eight open-source models are evaluated across two powertrains and three driving regimes. The detector attains average F1-scores of 0.97 across powertrains and 0.98 across regimes, with average mean error below 0.03. Zero-shot prompting proves insufficient (best 0.519 F1-score), whereas few-shot prompting reaches perfect discrimination under stable regimes, showing that prompting strategy, rather than parameter count, governs classification quality: a nine-billion-parameter model surpasses every zero-shot medium and large model. Mistral Small 24B is adopted as the main pipeline model for its balance of accuracy, class-balanced reliability, calibration, and inference cost, giving engineers interpretable diagnostic reports and more efficient validation.

Modern sequence models have a striking capacity for in-context learning (ICL); they can perform new tasks based only on examples given in the prompt. Understanding how this ability emerges requires theory that captures important properties of natural data. Linear regression has served as a useful sandbox for ICL theory, but existing work has largely focused on prompts with independent examples. In this work, we extend this setting to sequentially correlated data, a basic feature of real sequences. We present a solvable model based on linear attention and test our predictions on realistic transformer architectures. We identify two distinct effects: First, when the query token is independent of the context, within-context correlations induce an effective context length: correlated prompts behave like shorter i.i.d. prompts. Second, when the query is also correlated with its context, test error is reduced, particularly for softmax attention when compared to linear attention. These results suggest that correlated prompts alter not only the effective sample size of in-context learning, but also which attention architectures are best matched to the task.

Large language models (LLMs) can propose circuit-optimization decisions, but industrial analog flows cannot expose foundry PDK content, proprietary schematics, absolute simulation paths, or license-bound tool state to a cloud endpoint. We present SABLE (Safe Analog Boundary for LLM-driven EDA), an NDA-safe closed-loop framework that lets LLMs optimize analog circuits through Cadence Virtuoso, Maestro, and Spectre while returning only scrubbed topology intent, numeric metrics, operating-point summaries, and scoped writeback status. "NDA-safe" denotes enforcement under a stated curious-but-passive cloud-provider threat model, not a formal non-interference proof. The framework combines an explicit threat model, a whitelist of 28 scoped SKILL entry points, PDK/path/model scrubbing on every return path, structured Maestro setup and writeback, a strict JSON action contract with six machine-checked stop conditions, and best-so-far state preservation. We evaluate eleven LLM checkpoints from the same documented reset state on two real closed-loop tasks, both run as process-voltage-temperature (PVT) sign-offs across three corners: a 20 GHz LC-VCO tuning-curve task and a two-stage op-amp task. On the LC-VCO task 7 of 11 models pass; on the harder op-amp task, where every metric must hold at the worst corner and a phase-margin gate rejects unstable high-gain points, 4 of 11 pass within a 15-iteration budget. Feedback-path ablations show that removing individual sanitized channels either silently weakens the specification or degrades the search. Model quality differs sharply once the loop requires tool discipline, bias reasoning, and specification repair, yet an NDA-safe boundary still provides enough sanitized feedback for successful analog circuit optimization.

Background: Growing individual case safety report (ICSR) volumes have intensified demand for scalable automated causality assessment. Large Language Models (LLMs) show promise, yet performance on clinically demanding tasks remains suboptimal and inference-time hyperparameter optimization has not been investigated. Objective: To develop a Gaussian Process (GP)-compatible optimization objective and investigate whether temperature optimization improves LLM-expert agreement on Naranjo causality assessment of FAERS ICSRs. Methods: Expert causality assessments were performed on 723 stratified FAERS cases. OpenAI's GPT-5.2 was evaluated using chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting. Four composite metrics were developed: Weighted Cosine Similarity (WCS), Information-Weighted Agreement Score (IWAS), Entropy-Weighted Agreement and Cosine Similarity Score (EWACS), and Consensus-Weighted Cosine Similarity (CWCS) and Bayesian optimization using a GP surrogate with Probability of Improvement (PoI) acquisition was applied across temperature [0, 2]. Results: GPT-5.2 outperformed prior biomedical LLMs at baseline (T = 0), achieving 74.1% agreement on question 5 and 65.4% on question 10 of Naranjo algorithm. Entropy analysis identified these as the sole informative optimization targets. Temperature showed no systematic population-level effect (\b{eta} = 0.002, p = 0.959). EWACS-guided Bayesian optimization improved causality classification agreement from 45.0% to 72.0% (+27 pp), with the largest gain in Doubtful cases (+42.9 pp). Conclusion: EWACS was identified as the optimal GP-compatible metric. The absence of a universal temperature optimum indicates LLM performance is driven primarily by ICSR content, yet case-specific temperature selection produced meaningful improvements, supporting temperature optimization for LLM-assisted pharmacovigilance.

Recent hallucination detection techniques in large language models (LLMs) focus on directly extracting features from a model's internal representations and training a classifier on these features to detect hallucinations, demonstrating promising results. Notwithstanding this advancement, most internal-state hallucination detection techniques have been explored predominantly in English, raising the question of whether such internal signals generalize across different languages and domains. To address this gap, we present CrossHallu, the first study to evaluate the cross-lingual and cross-domain generalization of hallucination detection using internal representations from six LLMs on the generative question-answering task. We conduct a systematic Arabic <-> English evaluation using TruthfulQA, an Arabic translated version of TruthfulQA, and HalluScore. This evaluation encompasses monolingual training and testing, cross-lingual transfer, cross-domain transfer, and combined cross-lingual and cross-domain transfer. The results reveal that internal-state hallucination signals in LLMs transfer across languages and domains for most models, with cross-lingual performance highly dependent on both class separability and language alignment in the feature space, whereas cross-domain transfer within Arabic varies depending on the training and testing datasets used for the hallucination detector. The code is publicly available at https://github.com/aishaalansari57/CrossHal.

Integrating external tools with Large Language Models (LLMs) has emerged as a promising paradigm for accomplishing complex tasks. Since LLMs still struggle to effectively manage large tool collections, researchers have begun exploring retrieval-based methods to pre-select the most relevant options, addressing input length and latency constraints. However, existing retrievers are often misaligned with tool-calling LLMs due to their separate training processes. This paper presents PORTS, a novel odds ratio preference optimization method for training retrievers aimed at tool selection. Using a perplexity-inspired preference signal from a frozen LLM, our approach fine-tunes a retriever to find helpful tools by optimizing the correlation between the selection probabilities and the downstream performances while jointly enforcing a contrastive semantic loss between documentation strings. The versatility of PORTS and its ability to significantly improve tool selection accuracy are demonstrated through extensive experiments on six datasets, two encoder models, and three LLMs with diverse prior knowledge. With low computational demands, our alignment process facilitates generalization to new queries and tools, proving valuable for practical applications with evolving toolsets.

Complex Java methods remain challenging for automated unit test generation because achieving high coverage and fault detection often requires satisfying branch-specific testing requirements that are not directly visible from a focal method. Recent LLM-based approaches, such as KTester, PANTA, and MUTGEN, leverage project context, static analysis, coverage feedback, or mutation guidance. However, they do not explicitly represent and track individual testing requirements across iterations. As a result, generation may repeatedly target satisfied requirements while overlooking unresolved branches and weak assertions. Existing approaches also optimize structural coverage and mutation effectiveness separately. We present TATG, a tracking-aware LLM-based unit test generation approach. TATG introduces a unified objective representation that captures testing requirements derived from static analysis and dynamic feedback. The representation enables fine-grained tracking of satisfied and unresolved requirements throughout generation. TATG further employs a two-stage workflow: structural rounds improve coverage, followed by mutation-guided hardening rounds that strengthen assertions and improve fault detection. We evaluate TATG on 141 complex Java methods, including the 110 KTester subjects and 31 additional challenging methods. Compared with KTester and PANTA, TATG improves line coverage, branch coverage, and mutation score by 22.15, 20.14, and 37.66 percentage points on average. On a selected subset of focal methods, TATG also achieves performance comparable to a proprietary industrial test generation tool while achieving higher line coverage and mutation score.

Diffusion language models (DLLMs) generate text by iteratively denoising masked positions, exposing a trajectory of predictive distributions rather than a single instantaneous belief. Most existing decoders ignore this trajectory and commit tokens from the current snapshot alone, conflating confidence with commitment readiness: a transient top-1 peak under incomplete context can be locked in, while candidates with consistent cross-step support are delayed. We propose Trajectory-Aware Commit Gating (TACG), a training-free gate-level decoder that anchors token identities to the base posterior and uses trajectory-aware signals only to decide whether the current proposal is ready to commit. TACG combines Temporal Implicit Logits Guidance (TILG), which keeps an exponential moving average of past logits as a self-reference and contrasts the current logits against this reference in natural-parameter space, with a History Gate (HG) that enforces short-term proposal persistence before commitment. Together with a capped extra-promotion budget, these components yield a stability-constrained commit rule without auxiliary networks or extra forward passes. We evaluate TACG on LLaDA, Dream, and LLaDA2-Mini across code (HumanEval, MBPP) and math (GSM8K, MATH500) benchmarks; it typically improves or preserves accuracy while reducing denoising steps and increasing tokens per forward (TPF). The code is publicly available at https://github.com/Clarence-CV/TACG-DLLM.

Log anomaly detection is critical for reliability monitoring and failure diagnosis in modern software systems. Existing model-based detectors provide useful anomaly signals, but they can still miss anomalous sessions and typically expose only scores or labels rather than the operational semantics behind a decision. This lack of semantic evidence limits their ability to explain why a session is anomalous, even when the final anomaly label is correct. The gap matters in practice because operators need to distinguish urgent failures from benign deviations and trace suspicious sessions back to concrete operational behavior. LLMs can recover richer log semantics, but using them as standalone detectors or repeatedly generating free-form explanations can be costly and difficult to reuse. We present LogSemFuse, an evidence-guided plug-in framework that enhances existing backbone detectors without replacing their original pipelines. LogSemFuse combines backbone predictions with reusable semantic evidence from local event patterns, LLM-based semantic reasoning, and cluster-derived executable rules to produce both anomaly decisions and evidence-based explanations. The resulting output reports the final label together with the semantic evidence that supports it, such as fired local patterns, triggered rules, and LLM rationale. We evaluate LogSemFuse on HDFS, BGL, and Liberty using DeepLog, LogAnomaly, LogBERT, and NeuralLog as backbones. LogSemFuse improves every non-perfect baseline, preserves the already perfect case, recovers 98.8% of backbone false negatives, and produces explanations preferred over direct LLM explanations in a human study. These gains require only modest and stable inference-time overhead, showing that semantic augmentation can improve detection effectiveness and interpretability without imposing large runtime costs.