Almanac
← Events
6arXiv cs.LG (Machine Learning)·8d ago

Operadic consistency: a label-free signal for detecting compositional reasoning failures in LLMs

Researchers introduce operadic consistency (OC), a label-free inference-time signal that checks whether an LLM's direct answer to a compositional query agrees with the answer produced by composing its own stated decomposition of that query. Evaluated across 12 instruction-tuned LLMs (4B–671B parameters) on four multi-hop QA datasets, OC achieves Pearson r ∈ [0.86, 0.94] with accuracy uniformly across all datasets, outperforming self-consistency, semantic entropy, and P(True) in cross-dataset robustness. At the per-question level, OC provides information beyond existing baselines and yields selective-prediction improvements (AUARC lifts +0.086–0.096, AUROC lifts +0.092–0.164) at equal sampling cost, with results extending to frontier thinking models using chain-of-thought decompositions.

Related guides (3)

Related events (8)

5arXiv · cs.CL·8d ago·source ↗

Operads proposed as mathematical foundation for LLM question decomposition and consistency

Researchers propose operads — algebraic structures modeling many-in, one-out compositions — as a rigorous mathematical framework for question decomposition in LLMs. They define a 'questions operad' where QA models are interpreted as algebras, and introduce 'operadic consistency' as a measure of whether a model's answers agree across partial collapses of a decomposition tree. A companion empirical paper reports operadic consistency is strongly correlated with accuracy across twelve LLMs and four multi-hop QA datasets, outperforming temperature-based self-consistency baselines. The work attempts to give formal grounding to a widely-used but theoretically underspecified reasoning strategy.

7arXiv · cs.AI·22d ago·source ↗

Bounding Compositional Incoherence in Multi-Component LLM Agents

This paper formalizes a failure mode in multi-component LLM agent systems where individual components are locally probabilistically coherent but their composition violates basic probability axioms. The authors introduce the 'compositional residual' (eps*) as a runtime-computable measure of this incoherence, finding it positive in 33–94% of ensemble cliques across 1,876 tested configurations on a four-LLM panel. A hierarchical Boyle-Dykstra projection is proposed as a deterministic repair, and an anytime-valid e-process enables sequential monitoring. Notably, three intuitive LLM-side mitigations—retrieval, partition-aware prompting, and aggregator-LLM—each fail or regress.

6arXiv · cs.CL·22d ago·source ↗

Canonical-Context On-Policy Distillation (CCOPD) for Multi-Turn LLM Consistency

This paper identifies 'self-anchored drift' as a key failure mode in multi-turn LLMs: when information is revealed incrementally across turns, models produce unsupported assumptions that distort final answers, even when the total evidence is identical to a single-prompt setting. The authors propose Canonical-Context On-Policy Distillation (CCOPD), which trains a student model on incremental multi-turn conversations to match the output distribution of a frozen teacher conditioned on the full clean prompt. Trained only on math conversations, CCOPD achieves a 32% average relative improvement on multi-turn (RAW-SHARDED) tasks and generalizes zero-shot to five out-of-domain task families while preserving single-prompt performance.

5arXiv · cs.CL·4d ago·source ↗

Post-hoc falsification operators for frozen small code models fail to beat Best-of-N in leakage-free evaluation

A measurement study evaluates 26 post-hoc operators (selection, verification, repair, elimination, portfolios) applied to frozen small code models (≤1.5B parameters) against a Best-of-N baseline under a strict leakage-free, matched-compute protocol. None of the semantic operators improves held-out accuracy over BoN, with the failure traced to three structural mechanisms: a coverage wall, a capability scissors, and a near-empty consensus trap. Two non-semantic operators do provide value: an expression-layer recovery method (M1) lifts DeepSeek-Coder-1.3B by +12 tasks on HumanEval+ (p=2.4e-4), and an adaptive consensus early-stop saves ~19% compute with no accuracy harm. The paper's core lesson is that harness quality and coverage measurement should precede investment in semantic post-hoc reasoning.

5arXiv · cs.CL·4d ago·source ↗

Systematic study of extrinsic and intrinsic properties for effective code interpreter reasoning in LLMs

Researchers investigate what behavioral properties make LLMs effective at reasoning with a Code Interpreter (CI), identifying two axes: extrinsic 'crucial tokens' and intrinsic 'cognitive behaviors' such as verification, backtracking, and backward chaining. Stronger CI reasoning models consistently exhibit higher prevalence of these properties. The paper shows that appending code-specific crucial tokens at inference time improves performance on mathematical, ordering, and optimization tasks, while augmenting training with cognitive behaviors improves SFT and RL performance in two of three evaluated models. The work also finds these behaviors reduce overthinking in incorrect responses and improve token efficiency.

5arXiv · cs.CL·4d ago·source ↗

Semi-supervised framework scales LLM reasoning with minimal labeled data via lightweight verifier

A new arXiv preprint proposes a semi-supervised framework for training LLMs to reason with very few labeled examples, using a lightweight classifier to judge the validity of intermediate reasoning traces. An entropy-based confidence threshold filters unreliable pseudo-labels before fine-tuning. Experiments on math reasoning (Orca-Math subset) and visual QA (GQA) show accuracy comparable to using 10-15x more labeled data. The approach reduces dependence on expensive answer-level supervision by turning verification into a data-creation mechanism.

6arXiv · cs.CL·1mo ago·source ↗

Tracing the Emergence of Human-Like Pragmatic Reasoning in LLMs Across Languages

Researchers conducted a population-matching experiment evaluating 25 LLMs on conditional inference tasks across four languages, comparing model behavior to matched human populations. The study finds that LLMs function as accurate semantic operators but systematically fail to capture pragmatic enrichments—context-sensitive inferences beyond literal logical meaning—that humans apply effortlessly. Model performance on pragmatic reasoning is not predicted by open vs. closed weights, training orientation, or architecture type, suggesting pragmatic reasoning remains an emergent and unreliable capability. The findings contribute to ongoing debates about whether LLMs reason like humans or merely approximate surface-level linguistic patterns.

6arXiv · cs.CL·25d ago·source ↗

Semantic vs. Surface Noise in LLM Agents: 68-Cell Measurement Study with Held-Out Validation

This paper documents an empirical phenomenon across 10 LLMs from 7 architecture families: meaning-bearing perturbations (paraphrase, synonym substitution) cause final-answer inconsistency ~19.69 percentage points more often than presentation-level perturbations (formatting, reordering) of comparable severity, across GSM8K, MATH, and HotpotQA benchmarks. The effect is validated on a held-out 11th model (qwen2.5-14B-Instruct) with 1,800 trajectories. Trace-level analysis supports a 'stealth-divergence' picture where semantic perturbations preserve the first action but induce divergence in intermediate reasoning steps, while two prior mechanism claims are explicitly retracted. The study is notable for its honest reporting of stress-test failures and pre-registered replication.