Personalized Daily ArXiv Papers 2026-05-18

_{Papers on this page were re-scored with local agent CLI; the usage above is from the original run.}

Topic Coverage:

Table of contents by topic:

Architecture and Training Dynamics (14)

1. Judge Circuits Authors: Nils Feldhus, Tanja Baeumel, Elena Golimblevskaia, Qianli Wang, Van Bach Nguyen, Aaron Louis Eidt, Christopher Ebert, Wojciech Samek, Jing Yang, Vera Schmitt, Sebastian M\"oller, Simon Ostermann

2. GQA-{\mu}P: The maximal parameterization update for grouped query attention Authors: Kyle R. Chickering, Huijuan Wang, Mengxi Wu, Alexander Moreno, Muhao Chen, Xuezhe Ma, Daria Soboleva, Joel Hestness, Zhengzhong Liu, Eric Xing

3. Agentic Discovery of Neural Architectures: AIRA-Compose and AIRA-Design Authors: Alberto Pepe, Chien-Yu Lin, Despoina Magka, Bilge Acun, Yannan Nellie Wu, Anton Protopopov, Carole-Jean Wu, Yoram Bachrach

4. Syntax Without Semantics: Teaching Large Language Models to Code in an Unseen Language Authors: Vinayshekhar Bannihatti Kumar, Disha Makhija, Manoj Ghuhan Arivazhagan, Rashmi Gangadharaiah

5. On the Stability of Growth in Structural Plasticity Authors: Lute Lillo, Nick Cheney

6. Hidden in Memory: Sleeper Memory Poisoning in LLM Agents Authors: Sidharth Pulipaka, Stanislau Hlebik, Leonidas Raghav, Sahar Abdelnabi, Vyas Raina, Ivaxi Sheth, Mario Fritz

7. Feedback World Model Enables Precise Guidance of Diffusion Policy Authors: Tuo An, Jindou Jia, Gen Li, Jingliang Li, Chuhao Zhou, Pengfei Liu, Bofan Lyu, Jiaqi Bai, Xinying Guo, Geng Li, Jianfei Yang

8. Characterizing Learning in Deep Neural Networks using Tractable Algorithmic Complexity Analysis Authors: Pedram Bakhtiarifard, Sophia N. Wilson, Mahmoud Afifi, Jonathan Wensh{\o}j, Raghavendra Selvan

9. Deterministic Event-Graph Substrates as World Models for Counterfactual Reasoning Authors: Fabio Rovai

10. Entropic Auto-Encoding via Implicit Free-Energy Minimization Authors: Hazhir Aliahmadi, Irina Babayan, Greg van Anders

11. Bounded-Rationality, Hedging, and Generalization Authors: Pedro A. Ortega

12. BAPR: Bayesian amnesic piecewise-robust reinforcement learning for non-stationary continuous control Authors: Yifan Zhang, Liang Zheng

13. Imperfect World Models are Exploitable Authors: Logan Mondal Bhamidipaty (University of Edinburgh), Esmeralda S. Whitammer (University of Edinburgh), David Abel (University of Edinburgh), Mykel J. Kochenderfer (Stanford University), Subramanian Ramamoorthy (University of Edinburgh)

14. Bridging Silicon and the Hippocampus: Algebro-Deterministic Memory "VaCoAl" as a Substrate for Vector-HaSH and TEM Authors: Hiroyuki Chuma, Kanji Otsuka, Yoichi Sato

Training Algorithms That Change What Is Possible (2)

1. A Few GPUs, A Whole Lotta Scale: Faithful LLM Training Emulation with PrismLLM Authors: Shaoke Xi, ChonLam Lao, Boyi Jia, Jiaqi Gao, Zhipeng Zhang, Jiamin Cao, Brian Sutioso, Erci Xu, Minlan Yu, Kui Ren, Yong Li, Zhengping Qian, Ennan Zhai, Jingren Zhou

2. Going Beyond the Edge: Distributed Inference of Transformer Models on Ultra-Low-Power Wireless Devices Authors: Alexander Gr\"afe, Ding Huo, Johannes Berger, Marco Zimmerling, Sebastian Trimpe

MoE Where It Changes the Design Space (1)

1. $\phi$-Balancing for Mixture-of-Experts Training Authors: Lizhang Chen, Jonathan Li, Qi Wang, Runlong Liao, Shuozhe Li, Chen Liang, Ni Lao, Qiang Liu

Efficiency, Compression, and Large-Scale Training (2)

1. GQLA: Group-Query Latent Attention for Hardware-Adaptive Large Language Model Decoding Authors: Fanxu Meng

2. Hardware-Software Co-Design of Scalable, Energy-Efficient Analog Recurrent Computations Authors: Arthur Fyon, Julien Brandoit, Loris Mendolia, Damien Ernst, Jean-Michel Redout\'e, Guillaume Drion

Architecture and Training Dynamics (14)

1. Judge Circuits

ArXiv ID: 2605.16023

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Nils Feldhus, Tanja Baeumel, Elena Golimblevskaia, Qianli Wang, Van Bach Nguyen, Aaron Louis Eidt, Christopher Ebert, Wojciech Samek, Jing Yang, Vera Schmitt, Sebastian M\"oller, Simon Ostermann

Abstract: LLM-as-a-judge has become the dominant paradigm for grading model outputs at scale, yet the same model assigns systematically different scores when its output format changes (e.g., a 1-5 rating vs. a True/False label). Existing diagnoses of these format-induced inconsistencies stop at the input-output level. Using Position-aware Edge Attribution Patching (PEAP), we causally investigate the internal mechanism in Gemma-3, Qwen2.5, and Llama-3. We find that judgments across structured understanding and open-ended preference tasks share a sparse, generalized Latent Evaluator sub-graph in the mid-to-late multi-layer perceptrons (MLPs); zero-ablating it collapses judgment while preserving world knowledge in architecturally modular models. By structurally decoupling abstract judging from output formatting, we provide a mechanistic account of format-induced inconsistency on the open-weight models we study: a continuous judgment signal computed in the shared trunk is mapped through fragile, format-specific terminal branches, enabling format-independent preference to be isolated downstream of the requested output format. Our findings imply that benchmark-level reliability comparisons across formats are partially measuring formatter geometry rather than evaluation quality.

Comment: Causal ablations separate a shared judgment circuit from format-specific output branches.

Topic Match: Explains the internal computation behind format-sensitive judging, also satisfying the explicit benchmark-reliability exception.

Relevance: 9 Novelty: 9

2. GQA-{\mu}P: The maximal parameterization update for grouped query attention

ArXiv ID: 2605.15290

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Kyle R. Chickering, Huijuan Wang, Mengxi Wu, Alexander Moreno, Muhao Chen, Xuezhe Ma, Daria Soboleva, Joel Hestness, Zhengzhong Liu, Eric Xing

Abstract: Hyperparameter transfer across model architectures dramatically reduces the amount of compute necessary for tuning large language models (LLMs). The maximal update parameterization ({\mu}P) ensures transfer through principled mathematical analysis but can be challenging to derive for new model architectures. Building on the spectral feature-learning view of Yang et al. (2023a), we make two advances. First, we promote spectral norm conditions on the weights from a heuristic to the definition of feature learning, and as a consequence arrive at the Complete-P depth and weight-decay scalings without recourse to lazy-learning. Second, we consider a modified spectral norm that preserves the valid scaling law of network weights when weight matrices are not full rank. This enables (to our knowledge, the first) derivation of {\mu}P scalings for grouped-query attention (GQA). We demonstrate the efficacy of our theoretical derivations by showing learning rate transfer across the GQA repetition hyperparameter as well as experiments regarding transfer over weight decay.

Comment: Derives rank-aware muP scaling rules for learning-rate transfer across grouped-query attention repetition factors.

Topic Match: Attention parameterization and hyperparameter transfer directly connect layer design to optimization; experimental model sizes and datasets are unspecified.

Relevance: 10 Novelty: 8

3. Agentic Discovery of Neural Architectures: AIRA-Compose and AIRA-Design

ArXiv ID: 2605.15871

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Alberto Pepe, Chien-Yu Lin, Despoina Magka, Bilge Acun, Yannan Nellie Wu, Anton Protopopov, Carole-Jean Wu, Yoram Bachrach

Abstract: Toward recursive self-improvement, we investigate LLM agents autonomously designing foundation models beyond standard Transformers. We introduce a dual-framework approach: AIRA-Compose for high-level architecture search, and AIRA-Design for low-level mechanistic implementation. AIRA-Compose uses 11 agents to explore fundamental computational primitives under a 24-hour budget. Agents evaluate million-parameter candidates, extrapolating top designs to 350M, 1B, and 3B scales. This yields 14 architectures across two families: AIRAformers (Transformer-based) and AIRAhybrids (Transformer-Mamba). Pre-trained at 1B scale, these consistently outperform Llama 3.2 and Composer-found baselines. On downstream tasks, AIRAformer-D and AIRAhybrid-D improve accuracy by 2.4% and 3.8% over Llama 3.2. Furthermore, AIRA-Compose finds models with highly efficient scaling frontiers: AIRAformer-C scales 54% and 71% faster than Llama 3.2 and Composer's best Transformer, while AIRAhybrid-C outscales Nemotron-2 by 23% and Composer's best hybrid by 37%. AIRA-Design tasks 20 agents with writing novel attention mechanisms for long-range dependencies and high-performing training scripts. On the Long Range Arena benchmark, agent-designed architectures reach within 2.3% and 2.6% of human state-of-the-art on document matching and text classification. On the Autoresearch benchmark, Greedy Opus 4.5 achieves 0.968 validation bits-per-byte under a fixed time budget, surpassing the published minimum. Together, these frameworks show AI agents can autonomously discover architectures and algorithmic optimizations matching or surpassing hand-designed baselines. This establishes a powerful paradigm for discovering next-generation foundation models, marking a clear step toward recursive self-improvement.

Comment: Searches computational primitives and tests discovered Transformer and hybrid architectures in 1B-parameter pretraining.

Topic Match: Architecture search with pretrained candidates is the main match; specific layer decisions receive less attention than the discovery framework.

Relevance: 8 Novelty: 6

4. Syntax Without Semantics: Teaching Large Language Models to Code in an Unseen Language

ArXiv ID: 2605.15607

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Vinayshekhar Bannihatti Kumar, Disha Makhija, Manoj Ghuhan Arivazhagan, Rashmi Gangadharaiah

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve high pass rates on code generation benchmarks, yet whether they can transfer this ability to languages absent from pretraining remains poorly understood. We introduce PyLang, a minimal imperative language absent from all pretraining corpora, and evaluate frontier models zero-shot and fine-tuned Qwen3 (4B, 8B, 32B) on 352 problems. We find that fine-tuning quickly teaches syntax but fails to transfer semantic competence: Python outperforms PyLang by up to 19% across all configurations, and no intervention (multi-task learning, preference tuning, code infilling, or latent-space objectives) closes the gap. An LLM judge reveals that frontier models select an identical algorithm to Python 80% of the time, yet cannot translate it into a working PyLang implementation., and CKA analysis confirms that fine-tuned models converge to nearly identical internal representations across languages (CKA > 0.97) while diverging at the output stage. We term this the implementation fidelity gap: models possess language-agnostic algorithmic understanding but cannot express it in an unfamiliar language. Our findings highlight the need for training methods that decouple reasoning from language-specific realization.

Comment: Locates a code-transfer failure at the output stage despite similar internal representations.

Topic Match: Output-stage adaptation is the closest connection, but the contribution centers on code-transfer evaluation and fine-tuning.

Relevance: 4 Novelty: 6

5. On the Stability of Growth in Structural Plasticity

ArXiv ID: 2605.15435

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Lute Lillo, Nick Cheney

Abstract: Standard deep-learning pipelines usually choose the network architecture before training and keep it fixed throughout optimization. In contrast, a model can also be adapted by editing its structure during training, for example by pruning existing hidden-neuron units or growing new ones. Although growth is appealing for adaptive and continual systems, we show that it is not simply the inverse of pruning. Pruning selects among units that have participated in training from the start, whereas growth inserts new units into an already specialized optimization trajectory. We isolate this insertion problem and show that newborn units are often forward-active but backward-starved: they participate in the forward computation, yet receive much weaker gradient signal than incumbent units. This disadvantage is minor in small MLP benchmarks, but becomes clear in harder image-classification settings with a convolutional trunk. In these settings, \textsc{Grow} can achieve high final accuracy during the structural-editing procedure, while \textsc{Prune} is stronger when performance is averaged over the training trajectory or when the final sparse network is retrained from scratch. Interventions targeting optimizer state, insertion, selection, and trainability show that improving the integration of newborn units can improve adaptive performance, but does not automatically produce better final subnetworks. In continual-learning benchmarks stressing plasticity loss, \textsc{Grow} becomes competitive mainly when new units have enough time to integrate. Together, these results suggest that \textsc{Grow} should be evaluated not only as an architecture-search operator, but as a time-sensitive optimization process whose success depends on insertion stability.

Comment: Identifies gradient starvation of newly inserted neurons as a cause of unstable structural growth during training.

Topic Match: The mechanism concerns structural-editing dynamics, but its demonstrated scope is MLP and image-classification networks rather than language models.

Relevance: 3 Novelty: 8

6. Hidden in Memory: Sleeper Memory Poisoning in LLM Agents

ArXiv ID: 2605.15338

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Sidharth Pulipaka, Stanislau Hlebik, Leonidas Raghav, Sahar Abdelnabi, Vyas Raina, Ivaxi Sheth, Mario Fritz

Abstract: Large language models are increasingly augmented with persistent memory, allowing assistants to store user-specific information across sessions for personalization and continuity. This statefulness introduces a new security risk: adversarial content can corrupt what an assistant remembers and thereby influence future interactions. We propose and study sleeper memory poisoning, a delayed attack in which an adversary manipulates external context, such as a document, webpage, or repository, to cause the assistant to store a fabricated memory about the user. Unlike conventional prompt injection, the attack can remain dormant and re-emerge across multiple later conversations. We evaluate the full attack pipeline: whether poisoned memories are written, later retrieved, and ultimately used to steer the following conversations. Across stateful LLM assistants, poisoned memories were added up to 99.8% on GPT-5.5 and 95% on Kimi-K2.6. Crucially, among successful retrievals, poisoned memories cause attacker-intended agentic actions in 60-89% of evaluations across models. These results show that persistent memory can act as a long-term attack surface across multiple future conversations.

Comment: Demonstrates that poisoned persistent memories can trigger attacker-directed actions in later sessions.

Topic Match: Persistent state provides the nearest architectural connection, but the core subject is agent security rather than model training.

Relevance: 2 Novelty: 6

7. Feedback World Model Enables Precise Guidance of Diffusion Policy

ArXiv ID: 2605.15705

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Tuo An, Jindou Jia, Gen Li, Jingliang Li, Chuhao Zhou, Pengfei Liu, Bofan Lyu, Jiaqi Bai, Xinying Guo, Geng Li, Jianfei Yang

Abstract: World models aim to improve robotic decision making by predicting the consequences of actions. However, in practice, their predictions often become unreliable once the robot encounters states outside the training distribution, limiting their effectiveness at deployment. We observe that execution itself provides a natural but underutilized signal: after each action, the robot directly observes the true next state, revealing the mismatch between predicted and actual outcomes. Building on this insight, we propose feedback world model, a new paradigm that closes the loop between prediction and observation at inference time. Instead of treating the world model as a static open-loop predictor, our method maintains a lightweight feedback state that is updated online to iteratively correct future predictions, compensating for model errors using real-time observations without additional training data or parameter updates. We show that this process can be interpreted as a latent-space observer and admits convergence guarantees under mild conditions. We further introduce action-aware guidance to better translate corrected predictions into control by emphasizing action-controllable components while suppressing irrelevant variations. Experiments on LIBERO-Plus, Robomimic, and real-world manipulation tasks demonstrate that our method substantially improves both prediction accuracy and policy performance under distribution shift. In particular, it reduces world model prediction error by up to 76.4% and improves out-of-distribution (OOD) success rate by 30%. These results show that incorporating real-time feedback at inference time provides a simple yet powerful alternative to static world modeling.

Comment: Corrects world-model prediction errors online through a latent feedback state updated from observed transitions.

Topic Match: The dynamic mechanism is an inference-time observer for robotic policies, outside language-model training.

Relevance: 2 Novelty: 6

8. Characterizing Learning in Deep Neural Networks using Tractable Algorithmic Complexity Analysis

ArXiv ID: 2605.15551

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Pedram Bakhtiarifard, Sophia N. Wilson, Mahmoud Afifi, Jonathan Wensh{\o}j, Raghavendra Selvan

Abstract: Training large-scale deep neural networks (DNNs) is resource-intensive, making model compression a practical necessity. The widely accepted ''learning as compression'' hypothesis posits that training induces structure in network weights, which enables compression. Measuring this structure through Kolmogorov-Chaitin-Solomonoff (KCS) complexity is appealing, but existing estimators based on the Coding Theorem Method (CTM) and the Block Decomposition Method (BDM) are limited to small binary objects and do not scale to modern DNNs. We introduce the Quantized Block Decomposition method (QuBD), which extends algorithmic complexity estimation to any $k$-ary object. QuBD first quantizes the network weights to a finite alphabet, then estimates the KCS complexity by aggregating per bit-plane CTM estimates. We show theoretically that QuBD yields a strictly tighter estimation gap with respect to true KCS complexity than binarization-based methods. Using QuBD, we study how the algorithmic complexity of neural network weights evolves during training, showing that it decreases as models learn, scales with data budget, increases during overfitting, follows the delayed generalization observed during grokking, and correlates with generalization performance. We further show that algorithmic information resides predominantly in the most significant bit-planes, which can serve as a practical diagnostic for determining appropriate post-training quantization levels. This work offers novel insights into learning mechanisms in DNNs by providing the first scalable, tractable estimates of KCS complexity for large, non-binary objects such as DNN weights.

Comment: Estimates multi-bit weight complexity to track compression, overfitting, and delayed generalization across training.

Topic Match: Training-dynamics analysis is the closest category, but the abstract identifies no language-model setting and centers on a complexity diagnostic.

Relevance: 3 Novelty: 6

9. Deterministic Event-Graph Substrates as World Models for Counterfactual Reasoning

ArXiv ID: 2605.15967

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Fabio Rovai

Abstract: We study event-graph substrates: a class of world models that represent agent state as an append-only log of typed RDF triples and answer counterfactual queries by forking the log under a structured intervention vocabulary. Substrates are inspectable at the triple level, support exact counterfactuals, and transfer across domains without learned components. We formalize the class, prove a duality between explanatory and counterfactual queries that reduces both to the same causal-ancestor traversal, and evaluate a 1,400-line CLEVRER-DSL interpreter atop a domain-agnostic substrate runtime at full CLEVRER validation scale (n=75,618). The substrate exceeds the NS-DR symbolic oracle on all four per-question categories (by 9.89, 20.26, 17.65, and 0.80 percentage points), and exceeds the parametric ALOE baseline on descriptive and explanatory while lagging on predictive and counterfactual. We also introduce twin-EventLog, a 500-specification Park-canonical Smallville counterfactual benchmark on which the substrate exceeds Llama-3.1-8B with full context by 18.80 points joint accuracy.

Comment: Unifies explanatory and counterfactual queries through causal-ancestor traversal.

Topic Match: State representation is the nearest architectural topic; the substrate contains no trained model.

Relevance: 1 Novelty: 6

10. Entropic Auto-Encoding via Implicit Free-Energy Minimization

ArXiv ID: 2605.16164

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Hazhir Aliahmadi, Irina Babayan, Greg van Anders

Abstract: Despite their ubiquity, variational autoencoders (VAEs) inherently suffer from posterior collapse, a failure mode in which latent variables are effectively ignored. This failure arises because explicit prior imposition drives optimization toward loss landscape regions corresponding to uninformative latent representations. Here, we introduce Entropic Autoencoders (EAEs), a framework in which reconstruction loss is the only explicit objective, and entropy generates the latent variables' prior implicitly through a free energy-minimizing ensemble of encoders. This ensemble biases learning toward high-volume regions of near-optimal solutions, while decoder updates direct the search trajectories toward informative latent representations. We demonstrate that EAEs mitigate posterior collapse by learning non-Gaussian, multimodal latent distributions that yield diverse, data-consistent generations and preserve different forms of underlying structure in the data. As a proof-of-concept, we show that an EAE captures a superposition of the known low-dimensional dynamics of a reaction-diffusion process. Then, we show that an EAE identifies implicit categorical distinctions in MNIST latent representations, and displays a hierarchical understanding of facial structure on the CelebA dataset, from an "all-human" face to individual-dependent features.

Comment: Replaces explicit latent-prior penalties with an implicit prior generated through an entropy-driven encoder ensemble.

Topic Match: Training-objective design is the nearest category, but the core subject is autoencoding and posterior collapse on image and physical-process data.

Relevance: 2 Novelty: 9

11. Bounded-Rationality, Hedging, and Generalization

ArXiv ID: 2605.15340

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Pedro A. Ortega

Abstract: A learner does not only fit data; it also determines how strongly the training sample may shape its output and how much distortion it can hedge. We study this relation as a bounded-rational decision problem whose primitive object is the induced channel from samples to outputs. The learner's response law determines which changes in this channel are cheap or costly, and therefore induces both a lower tradeoff curve between training loss and sample dependence and a matched upper certificate curve. When the response law is represented by an $f$-divergence regularizer, these curves live in the regularizer's native information geometry, with KL as the special case corresponding to Shannon mutual information. We show how the hedge and the two curves can be recovered from black-box behavior by observing responses to scaled losses and local loss perturbations. In learning, population loss is empirical loss plus the distortion induced by the particular training sample. The recovered hedge gives a practical certificate when it covers that distortion. Thus generalization is treated as a testable hedging property of the learner's own response law.

Comment: Derives generalization certificates from a learner's loss-response geometry.

Topic Match: Generalization theory is the closest connection to training dynamics, but no language-model training setting is established.

Relevance: 2 Novelty: 7

12. BAPR: Bayesian amnesic piecewise-robust reinforcement learning for non-stationary continuous control

ArXiv ID: 2605.16170

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Yifan Zhang, Liang Zheng

Abstract: Real-world control systems frequently operate under \emph{piecewise stationary} conditions, where dynamics remain stable for extended periods before undergoing abrupt regime changes. Standard robust RL methods face a fundamental dilemma: a globally conservative policy wastes performance during stable periods, while a locally adaptive policy risks catastrophic failure when the regime changes undetected. We propose \textbf{BAPR} (Bayesian Amnesic Piecewise-Robust SAC), which unifies Bayesian Online Change Detection (BOCD) with robust ensemble RL. The BAPR operator -- a convex combination of mode-conditional Bellman operators weighted by a frozen belief distribution -- is a $\gamma$-contraction. A complementary counterexample, machine-verified in Lean~4, establishes a \emph{sharp boundary}: when beliefs depend on the Q-function, the contraction factor becomes $\gamma + \lambda\Delta$ (where $\Delta$ is the mode reward gap), and contraction fails exactly when $\gamma + \lambda\Delta \geq 1$. We derive a \emph{component-wise} formal error budget for the abstract operator -- every component machine-verified -- bounding post-switch recovery; the budget applies to the abstract mode-mixture operator and inherits to the implemented shared-critic algorithm only through the frozen-parameter design intuition. All results are formally verified with no \texttt{sorry} (1,145 lines across 3 Lean~4 files, 22 machine-verified theorems). BOCD drives an adaptive conservatism mechanism: the policy becomes maximally conservative after detected change-points and smoothly relaxes as confidence grows, with detection delay $O(\log(1/\delta))$. A context-conditioning module trained via RMDM loss provides mode-aware representations from simulator-provided mode IDs at training time and requires no mode labels at deployment.

Comment: Shows how freezing mixture beliefs preserves Bellman contraction and identifies a sharp failure boundary for value-dependent beliefs.

Topic Match: Optimization stability is the nearest category, but the contribution concerns reinforcement learning for non-stationary continuous control.

Relevance: 1 Novelty: 7

13. Imperfect World Models are Exploitable

ArXiv ID: 2605.15960

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Logan Mondal Bhamidipaty (University of Edinburgh), Esmeralda S. Whitammer (University of Edinburgh), David Abel (University of Edinburgh), Mykel J. Kochenderfer (Stanford University), Subramanian Ramamoorthy (University of Edinburgh)

Abstract: We propose a novel definition of model exploitation in reinforcement learning. Informally, a world model is exploitable if it implies that one policy should be strictly preferred over another while the environment's true transition model implies the reverse. We analogize our definition with a prior characterization of reward hacking but show that the associated proof of inevitability does not transfer to exploitation. To overcome this obstruction, we develop a general theory of reward hacking and model exploitation that proves that exploitation is essentially unavoidable on large policy sets and yields the corresponding claim for hacking as a special case. Unfortunately, we also find that the conditions that guarantee unhackability in finite policy sets have no counterpart that precludes exploitation. Consequently, we introduce a relaxed notion of exploitation and derive a safe horizon within which it can be avoided. Taken together, our results establish a formal bridge between reward hacking and model exploitation and elucidate the limits of safe planning in world models.

Comment: Derives when world-model errors necessarily reverse policy preferences and bounds a horizon that avoids relaxed exploitation.

Topic Match: Dynamics analysis is the nearest category; the subject is reinforcement-learning planning theory rather than language-model training.

Relevance: 1 Novelty: 8

14. Bridging Silicon and the Hippocampus: Algebro-Deterministic Memory "VaCoAl" as a Substrate for Vector-HaSH and TEM

ArXiv ID: 2605.15652

Primary Topic: Architecture and Training Dynamics

Authors: Hiroyuki Chuma, Kanji Otsuka, Yoichi Sato

Abstract: Vector-HaSH and the Tolman-Eichenbaum Machine (TEM) propose that the hippocampal-entorhinal circuit factorizes content from a prestructured grid-cell scaffold and supports compositional memory via ripple-mediated replay. Human iEEG shows that hippocampal sharp-wave ripples (SWRs) gate episodic recall, ripple-locked cortical reactivation recapitulates encoding-time patterns, and multi-hop replay fidelity decays multiplicatively along sequence length. These literatures have advanced in parallel without a shared algebraic object. We show that VaCoAl, an algebro-deterministic hyperdimensional memory architecture built from Galois-field LFSRs, supplies that object. Specifically, deterministic Galois-field diffusion provides a substrate-level alternative to Vector-HaSH's random scaffold-to-hippocampus projection that satisfies the same quasi-orthogonality requirement, with matched second-moment statistics, stronger avalanche behavior, and bit-exact reproducibility. The path-integral Confidence Ratio $CR_2$, the product of per-step $CR_1$ values along an $n$-hop chain, is the natural functional form for multi-hop replay-fidelity decay under conditional independence of per-step reactivation, providing the first algebraically tractable model of reported multiplicative decay. STDP-like path selection in VaCoAl follows from architectural demands -- similarity preservation, compositional reversibility, and bounded-frontier search -- that also constrain hippocampal computation. We further argue that VaCoAl operating regimes share architectural commitments with the EC--CA3 and EC--DG--CA3 pathways, motivating an energy-capacity-plasticity reading of why both are conserved across $>$520 Myr of evolution and primate dentate-gyrus elaboration. We prove formal correspondences, derive testable iEEG predictions, and bridge computational neuroscience and hyperdimensional engineering.

Comment: Uses deterministic finite-field structure to reproduce quasi-orthogonality requirements in associative-memory scaffolds.

Topic Match: Architecture is the nearest label, but the subject is hippocampal and hyperdimensional memory rather than language-model training.

Relevance: 1 Novelty: 6

Training Algorithms That Change What Is Possible (2)

1. A Few GPUs, A Whole Lotta Scale: Faithful LLM Training Emulation with PrismLLM

ArXiv ID: 2605.15617

Primary Topic: Training Algorithms That Change What Is Possible

Authors: Shaoke Xi, ChonLam Lao, Boyi Jia, Jiaqi Gao, Zhipeng Zhang, Jiamin Cao, Brian Sutioso, Erci Xu, Minlan Yu, Kui Ren, Yong Li, Zhengping Qian, Ennan Zhai, Jingren Zhou

Abstract: Large language model (LLM) training today runs on clusters spanning thousands of GPUs. While this scale enables rapid model advances, developing, debugging, and performance-tuning the training framework inevitably becomes complex and costly. This is because engineers often need to reproduce production behaviors to diagnose failures or evaluate optimizations, thereby demanding frequent and even exclusive access to production-scale clusters -- which becomes increasingly hard given that the majority of GPUs are already committed to production workloads. Simulation relies on complex performance models that are difficult to maintain, and downscaled experiments often fail to capture scale-dependent behaviors. We present PrismLLM to decouple large-scale execution from the need to access large clusters, enabling engineers to run and observe ranks of interest under faithful large-scale behavior using only a few GPUs. PrismLLM constructs a high-fidelity execution graph via a slicing-based approach that captures computation, communication, and dependencies of the target scale. Then, PrismLLM performs hybrid emulation where selected ranks execute the original program while the remaining ranks are replayed as virtual participants. Experiments on large-scale LLM training workloads show that PrismLLM accurately reproduces performance and memory behavior, achieving only 0.58\% average error in iteration time and less than 0.01\% error in peak GPU memory usage. PrismLLM can emulate clusters of up to 8192 GPUs using fewer than 1\% of the physical GPUs required by the original deployment.

Comment: Executes selected training ranks and virtualizes the remainder to reproduce large-cluster behavior using few GPUs.

Topic Match: Training systems is the closest category, but the contribution enables framework profiling and debugging rather than a new training algorithm or parallelism invariant.

Relevance: 5 Novelty: 7

2. Going Beyond the Edge: Distributed Inference of Transformer Models on Ultra-Low-Power Wireless Devices

ArXiv ID: 2605.15694

Primary Topic: Training Algorithms That Change What Is Possible

Authors: Alexander Gr\"afe, Ding Huo, Johannes Berger, Marco Zimmerling, Sebastian Trimpe

Abstract: Transformer models are rapidly becoming a cornerstone of modern Internet of Things (IoT) applications, yet their computational and memory demands far exceed the capabilities of a single typical ultra-low-power IoT device. We present CATS, a framework for distributed transformer inference on ultra-low-power wireless devices, enabling multiple devices to collaboratively execute models far larger than what a single device can sustain. At its core, CATS is a communication-aware distributed transformer inference scheme co-designed across transformer partitioning, wireless communication and training. It employs SomeGather, a new pruned communication primitive that selectively broadcasts activation columns to reduce communication bandwidth and RAM usage without sacrificing model accuracy. Building on SomeGather, we design a partitioning method that exploits this primitive for efficient model parallelism. To cope with unreliable wireless communication, CATS employs message-dropout during training, which mimics packet losses and yields models that are robust to message loss during inference. In real-world experiments, we show that CATS brings distributed transformer inference to ultra-low-power wireless devices for the first time, with deployments on up to 16 devices that collaboratively execute transformer models up to 14 times larger than what a single device can run.

Comment: Uses message-dropout training to make distributed transformers tolerate missing inter-device activations.

Topic Match: Distributed execution is the nearest systems connection, but the demonstrated contribution is transformer inference on IoT devices.

Relevance: 3 Novelty: 6

MoE Where It Changes the Design Space (1)

1. $\phi$-Balancing for Mixture-of-Experts Training

ArXiv ID: 2605.15403

Primary Topic: MoE Where It Changes the Design Space

Authors: Lizhang Chen, Jonathan Li, Qi Wang, Runlong Liao, Shuozhe Li, Chen Liang, Ni Lao, Qiang Liu

Abstract: Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models rely on balanced expert utilization to fully realize their scalability. However, existing load-balancing methods are largely heuristic and operate on noisy mini-batch assignment statistics, introducing bias relative to population-level objectives. We propose $\phi$-balancing, a principled framework that directly targets population-level expert balance by minimizing a strictly convex, symmetric, and differentiable potential of the expected routing distribution. Using convex duality, we derive an equivalent min-max formulation and obtain a simple online algorithm via mirror descent, yielding an efficient EMA-based routing adjustment with negligible overhead. Across large-scale pretraining and downstream fine-tuning, $\phi$-balancing consistently outperforms prior Switch-style and loss-free baselines, demonstrating more stable and effective expert utilization.

Comment: Targets population-level expert balance instead of noisy mini-batch assignment counts through an online dual update.

Topic Match: The core contribution changes the MoE balancing objective and training-time router adjustment, with Switch-style and loss-free baselines.

Relevance: 9 Novelty: 7

Efficiency, Compression, and Large-Scale Training (2)

1. GQLA: Group-Query Latent Attention for Hardware-Adaptive Large Language Model Decoding

ArXiv ID: 2605.15250

Primary Topic: Efficiency, Compression, and Large-Scale Training

Authors: Fanxu Meng

Abstract: Multi-head Latent Attention (MLA), the attention used in DeepSeek-V2/V3, jointly compresses keys and values into a low-rank latent and matches the H100 roofline almost perfectly. Its trained weights, however, expose only one decoding path - an absorbed MQA form - which ties efficient inference to H100-class compute-bandwidth ratios, forfeits tensor parallelism along the head axis, and yields no Multi-Token Prediction (MTP) gain on commodity inference GPUs such as the export-restricted H20. We propose Group-Query Latent Attention (GQLA), a minimal modification of MLA whose trained weights expose two algebraically equivalent decoding paths over the same parameters: an MQA-absorb path identical to MLA's, and a GQA path with a per-group expanded cache. The runtime picks the path that matches the target hardware - no retraining, no custom kernels - so a single set of GQLA weights pins the rooflines of both H100 (MQA-absorb, s_q=1) and H20 (GQA + MTP, s_q=2), while supporting up to 8-way zero-redundancy tensor parallelism on the GQA path. To avoid pretraining from scratch we extend TransMLA into TransGQLA, which converts a pretrained GQA checkpoint into a GQLA model; on LLaMA-3-8B it compresses the per-token KV cache to 28.125% of the GQA baseline on the MQA-absorb path while structurally preserving GQA-level traffic on the per-group path.

Comment: Supports algebraically equivalent absorbed-MQA and expanded-GQA decoding paths while holding trained parameters fixed.

Topic Match: Cache efficiency is the best fit, but the core payoff is hardware-dependent decoding throughput; quality-preserving compression relative to the source model is not established.

Relevance: 5 Novelty: 8

2. Hardware-Software Co-Design of Scalable, Energy-Efficient Analog Recurrent Computations

ArXiv ID: 2605.15216

Primary Topic: Efficiency, Compression, and Large-Scale Training

Authors: Arthur Fyon, Julien Brandoit, Loris Mendolia, Damien Ernst, Jean-Michel Redout\'e, Guillaume Drion

Abstract: Always-on AI applications, from environmental sensors to biomedical implants, require ultra-low power consumption. Analog circuits offer a path to sub-microwatt inference, yet existing analog implementations are limited to feedforward architectures: extending them to recurrent dynamics has been considered impractical due to noise accumulation through temporal feedback. We demonstrate that this barrier can be overcome through hardware-software co-design. Specifically, we identify that Bistable Memory Recurrent Units (BMRUs), a class of Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) with discrete-valued outputs and hysteretic dynamics, admit an ultra-low power current-mode analog implementation which we design from first principles. The resulting circuit establishes a one-to-one correspondence between each learned parameter and a circuit element. The discrete outputs suppress analog noise by at least 20-fold at each cell boundary, breaking the noise accumulation that prevents analog recurrence. We reformulate BMRUs for first-quadrant operation with fixed thresholds, enabling the direct correspondence while preserving expressivity and trainability. Transistor-level simulations in 180 nm Complementary Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor (CMOS) show near-perfect agreement between software predictions and circuit-level behavior, with the software model thereby serving as a high-fidelity simulator of the physical hardware at low computational cost. We leverage this fidelity to conduct large-scale noise immunity and power scaling analyses: the power cost of adding recurrence scales linearly with state dimension, while the feedforward layers dominating total power scale quadratically, meaning recurrence is added at linear marginal cost relative to the feedforward backbone. End-to-end keyword spotting achieves sub-microwatt inference at the RNN core.

Comment: Uses discrete recurrent outputs to suppress analog noise accumulation and enable a direct parameter-to-circuit mapping.

Topic Match: Hardware efficiency is the closest category, but the contribution concerns analog keyword-spotting inference rather than language-model training numerics.

Relevance: 2 Novelty: 8

Paper Selection Prompt

System Prompt

You are a helpful paper reading assistant whose job is to read daily posts from ArXiv and identify a few papers that your friend will enjoy reading. Your job is to carefully read the paper titles and abstracts below and find the ones that match the criteria below.

User Prompt

Relevant Topics

This is a training-side feed for someone who builds and modifies model internals. The centre of gravity is what a frontier model is made of and how it is trained: architecture, training dynamics, and the decisions a lab actually made. MoE is still in scope, but only when the contribution changes the design space, not when it tunes an existing MoE.

Keep a paper when its CORE CONTRIBUTION falls in one of the five topics below. Filter it when the topic is merely the setting for a downstream application, a benchmark, or a product result.

THE SUBJECT IS LANGUAGE-MODEL TRAINING. Every topic below is scoped to it. A technique named in one of them -- decentralised or asynchronous training, discrete diffusion, byte-level modelling, 1-bit weights, mixture-of-experts -- earns nothing when the model being trained is an image generator, a recommender, a scientific surrogate, or a vision classifier. Match on what is being trained, not on the vocabulary in the abstract.

THE ONE QUESTION THAT DECIDES A HIGH SCORE, asked before the topic list:

Does this paper REMOVE or REPLACE a component that everyone downstream inherits without thinking, or DECOUPLE two quantities the field currently conflates -- and does it say which end is held fixed while the other moves?

A paper that ADDS a mechanism on top of existing primitives is ordinary work, however good the numbers. A paper that takes one away, or splits one knob into two, is the reason this feed exists. Papers whose gains are CONDITIONAL (only above some batch size, only in one budget regime, only with an extra training stage) are ordinary work too, even when the mechanism is new: a conditional win is a new knob, not a removed one.

1. Frontier Model Releases and Technical Reports (primary) - Keep: model and technical reports that DISCLOSE architecture or training decisions -- layer and attention design, normalization and residual choices, hybrid attention/state-space stacks, sparsity and expert layout, tokenizer and vocabulary decisions, data mixture and curriculum, optimizer and schedule, precision and numerics, stability fixes and what broke; open-weight releases whose report explains a choice rather than only reporting it. - Filter: releases that are a scorecard -- benchmark tables, a capability announcement, a product or API launch, or a report that names its recipe without saying why it was chosen. A frontier name in the title earns nothing on its own.

2. Architecture and Training Dynamics (primary) - Keep: new or analysed architectural mechanisms (attention variants, normalization and residual design, state-space and recurrent sequence modelling, positional schemes, dynamic or modular computation, tokenizer-free and byte-level or learned-chunking stacks, non-autoregressive and discrete-diffusion generation); optimizers, preconditioners, and parameterisations, especially hyperparameter transfer across scale; training-dynamics and stability analysis that explains why large models train the way they do; work that removes a standard component (normalization, weight decay, positional encoding, the tokenizer, left-to-right decoding) and shows the model still trains. - Filter: applying an existing architecture to a new task or benchmark with no mechanistic insight; an architectural tweak evaluated only at toy scale with no account of what it costs.

3. Large-Scale Training Systems - Keep: distributed training ALGORITHMS that change what is possible, not only what is fast -- asynchronous, low-communication and decentralised optimisation, sharding and parallelism schemes with a new invariant, numerics and low-precision training (FP8, FP4, ternary and 1-bit) when the claim is about training stability rather than a kernel; scaling-law work that informs how a run is configured, including data-constrained and repeated-data regimes and critical batch size. - Filter: kernel engineering, communication scheduling, overlap, caching, serving and inference throughput. This is a real exclusion, not a soft one: work whose contribution is "the same model, faster" belongs to someone else's feed even when it is excellent and even when it is about MoE.

4. MoE Where It Changes the Design Space - Keep: routing that is newly differentiable or newly stable; the training/inference router gap; expert collapse and what actually prevents it; expert granularity, shared experts and layout when a new axis is opened rather than tuned; dense-to-MoE conversion; MoE scaling laws that fix one quantity and vary another; analyses that carry a criterion which could have failed (a random-guess baseline, an ablation with a predicted sign) rather than similarity heatmaps. - Filter: MoE SYSTEMS and inference work (expert parallelism, all-to-all schedules, grouped GEMM, offload, prefetching, capacity and scheduling tricks, compression for serving); MoE surveys; papers that train on top of a MoE without a routing, balancing, stability, or structural contribution; "mixture of experts" in the classical ensemble or recommender sense. - The exclusion above is about MAKING MoE RUN FASTER, and it does not reach routing and expert design. A paper on how tokens are assigned to experts, how experts specialise, how balance is enforced, or how a dense model becomes sparse stays fully in scope and scores on its merits, even when the mechanism is a small one.

5. Efficiency and Compression When the Mechanism Is New - Keep: quantization, sparsity, pruning and low-rank work whose mechanism is new and whose gain is unconditional; compression that changes what can be trained, not only what can be served; attribution of a model's behaviour to its data. - Filter: tuned variants of standard efficiency methods; deployment and serving engineering; anything whose headline is a compression ratio with no account of what was given up.

Also keep, even though they read like evaluation work, because the field has no one checking them: - benchmark validity itself: contamination, saturation, LLM-as-judge reliability, whether a benchmark measures what it claims. A paper AUDITING a benchmark is in scope; a paper PROPOSING one is not.

Subjects He Has Never Once Kept

Measured, not guessed. Over nine months where he was actively curating, 4953 papers passed this filter and 274 made his list -- a keep rate of 5.2%. Each subject below appeared in the rejected pile the number of times shown and appeared ZERO times in his entire 508-entry list.

Filter a paper whose CORE SUBJECT is one of these. The count is the evidence; where a paper only mentions the term in passing while contributing somewhere in the five topics above, keep it.

variational methods and inference (52) unlearning (41) long-context methods (40) neural operators (35) time series (35) vision transformers (35) parameter-efficient fine-tuning (28) stochastic gradient analysis (21) LLM safety (20) LLM reasoning as a subject (20) hallucination (20) sequence modelling as a subject (19) differential equations (19) spiking neural networks (17) post-training quantization (16) mechanistic interpretability as a framing (15) test-time scaling (13)

Two more he kept exactly once each, so suppress rather than drop: graph neural networks (1 of 42), knowledge distillation (1 of 39).

Do NOT extend this list by analogy. Four subjects that look like they belong here were checked and do not: diffusion models (8.1% kept), prompting (10.0%), benchmarks (9.1%) and neural architecture search (13.3%) all sit ABOVE his 5.2% base rate.

Note the one distinction that matters: he rejects papers FRAMED as interpretability, while analysis of how a trained model's computation is organised is among his highest-rated work. The subject is the framing, not the act of analysing.

Leave these to the hotspot digest unless the core contribution clearly falls in one of the five topics above: - agent, tooling, and RAG launches, and agent framework papers - new benchmarks, leaderboards, and evaluation-only papers - interpretability that stops at cataloguing features, with nothing said about the mechanism that produced them. Analysis of how a trained model's computation is organised -- what drives expert selection, what a circuit computes, how representations reorganise across training -- is IN scope, not here. - memory mechanisms and agent memory systems - world models, exploration, and reinforcement learning - alignment and post-training (RLHF, DPO, GRPO, RFT, instruction tuning), EXCEPT where the subject is how post-training destabilises the architecture itself - downstream applications in medical imaging, segmentation, 3D vision, video understanding, information retrieval, summarization, recommendation, machine translation, speech recognition, time series, knowledge graphs, and similar domains

Scoring Criteria

Score five independent axes from 1 to 10: Relevance, Novelty, Evidence, Load, Proximity.

They answer different questions and must not be collapsed. Relevance: is this the kind of work this feed is for. Evidence: did the paper earn its claim. Load: what does it cost to get the usable result out. Proximity: how close is it to what the reader is working on right now (see Active Lines below).

Novelty is scored for continuity with the archive and for the hotspot spotlight cutoffs, and it does NOT order the feed. Measured against 274 hand-tiered papers it carried no signal at all: papers scoring 8 or more were his must-reads exactly as often as papers scoring 5 or less, both at the pool's base rate. Every abstract claims novelty, so the axis measures the claiming rather than the work. Score it honestly and do not let it influence the other four.

A strong claim with thin evidence is a worse read than a modest claim that holds. Score each axis on its own; do not let a high one pull up a low one.

Relevance Scoring

• 9-10: directly centered on the target topics; highest when the core contribution is clearly within them and the paper is about how a model is BUILT or TRAINED.
• 7-8: substantially related, but partly peripheral or focused on a narrower aspect.
• 5-6: touches the target topics, but the main contribution is elsewhere.
• 3-4: largely outside the target topics, often application-focused or domain-specific.
• 1-2: unrelated.

Important: Daily buzz, a frontier lab's name, or a large headline number is not enough for a high Relevance score. A model release scores high only when the report explains an architecture or training decision; a release that only reports results is hotspot material, not this feed.

Work whose contribution is "the same model, faster" -- kernels, communication schedules, overlap, caching, serving -- caps at Relevance 5 even when it is excellent and even when it is about MoE. Making a known design run faster is a different job from changing the design.

That cap is about SPEED, not about size. Compression that is lossless, or that changes what can be trained or held in memory at all rather than how quickly it runs, is not capped: it changes what is possible, which is the thing this feed is for.

Analysis of how a trained model's computation is actually organised -- what a circuit computes, what drives expert selection, how representations reorganise over training -- IS in scope and scores like any other work on mechanism. Only interpretability that stops at describing features, with nothing said about the mechanism that produced them, drops out of the feed.

Novelty Scoring

Novelty means a change to the design space, not a change to a number. Score against this ladder:

• 9-10: removes or replaces a component the whole field inherits without thinking (normalization, weight decay, the tokenizer, positional encoding, left-to-right decoding, the standard optimizer, a numerical format), or decouples two quantities everyone conflates -- AND states which end is held fixed while the other moves. The claim is unconditional: it does not require a particular scale, budget regime, or extra stage. An ANALYSIS paper reaches this band when it settles a mechanism-level question with a criterion that could have come out the other way.
• 7-8: a substantial new mechanism, or a decoupling whose gain is real but CONDITIONAL (holds above some batch size, in one budget band, or with an added training phase). A conditional win is a new knob, not a removed one, and belongs here rather than above.
• 5-6: meaningful but incremental extension or refinement of an existing primitive; a tuned variant; a well-executed combination of known parts.
• 3-4: minor, narrow, or mostly engineering or domain-specific improvement; a survey or overview, however thorough.
• 1-2: little originality; mainly standard application of existing methods.

Score the claim as the paper states it here. Whether the paper supports that claim is Evidence, and it is scored separately -- do not discount Novelty for weak experiments, and do not raise it because the framing is confident. Phrases like "we remove", "without X", "holding Y fixed" are what the paper SAYS; they earn a high Novelty only if the thing named really is a component the field inherits by default, not a component this paper introduced two sentences earlier.

Evidence Scoring

Does the demonstration reach as far as the claim?

• 9-10: shown at the scale and breadth the claim asserts -- language-model pretraining at billion-parameter or hundred-billion-token scale, or across several model families, sizes, or domains -- with ablations that isolate the named mechanism and could have failed.
• 7-8: one credible setting that matches the claim's stated scope, with the baselines a skeptic would ask for.
• 5-6: a single small setting, or a claim stated more broadly than the demonstration reaches.
• 3-4: the claim is about transformers or language models in general, but the demonstration lives in one narrow domain or one small benchmark -- image classification alone, a single toy task, one dataset; or the comparisons a reader needs in order to believe it are missing.
• 1-2: the central claim is asserted, illustrated, or supported only by plots that could not have come out the other way.

A structural claim demonstrated only outside the setting it claims is capped at 4, however striking the claim. "We removed a component everyone uses" shown only on small vision models is a result about small vision models.

When the abstract names no scale, no dataset, and no baseline at all, score exactly 5. Do not infer rigor from confident writing. Unstated is not the same as strong, and two thirds of abstracts say nothing here: guessing on those was measured to make this axis worse.

Adjustments: subtract 1 when no code is released and the procedure is not reproducible from the paper alone; subtract 1 when the method's cost grows in the number of components it adds (one loss per pair of experts, one module per domain) and the paper does not account for that growth; add 1 when the paper states its own limitation precisely enough that a reader could design the experiment that breaks it.

Load Scoring

What does it cost to get the usable result out? This is about the reader's effort, not quality.

• 9-10: the result cannot be taken without following the derivation -- a new theoretical framework, unfamiliar mathematical machinery, or a proof that IS the contribution.
• 7-8: substantial theory or an involved formalism, but the operational result is stated plainly somewhere.
• 4-6: ordinary methods paper; the recipe is legible from the paper's own description.
• 1-3: the takeaway is a single decision or number a reader can act on immediately.

A high Load is not a criticism. It only says the paper is a project rather than a read.

Proximity Scoring

How close is this to the Active Lines stated below? This axis is about the reader, not the paper, and a paper can be excellent and distant at the same time.

• 9-10: squarely on a centre line -- the paper's core contribution is the thing the reader is working on, and a result here changes what they would do next.
• 7-8: on a centre line but from a direction they are not working from, or on an adjacent line where the result carries over directly.
• 5-6: adjacent: same stack, different layer; they would want to know it happened.
• 3-4: far: recognisable as the same field, but nothing here reaches their work.
• 1-2: another area entirely.

Judge distance from the reader's stated centre, NOT from whatever is currently prominent in the field. A paper everyone is discussing is not thereby close.

Topic Registry

Use exactly one PRIMARY_TOPIC_ID chosen from the stable topic IDs below. - frontier_models: Frontier Model Releases and Technical Reports - Frontier model and technical reports that disclose an architecture or training decision: layer and attention design, normalization and residual choices, hybrid stacks, sparsity layout, tokenizer and data mixture, optimizer and schedule, precision, and the stability problems that had to be solved. - architecture_training: Architecture and Training Dynamics - Architectural and optimisation mechanisms, and the training dynamics that explain them: attention and normalization design, positional schemes, state-space and recurrent stacks, tokenizer-free and learned-chunking models, non-autoregressive and discrete-diffusion generation, optimizers and parameterisations including hyperparameter transfer across scale, and work that removes a standard component and shows the model still trains. - training_systems: Training Algorithms That Change What Is Possible - Distributed training algorithms that change what can be trained rather than how fast it runs: asynchronous, low-communication and decentralised optimisation, parallelism schemes with a new invariant, low-precision and 1-bit training when the claim is stability, and scaling laws including data-constrained regimes and critical batch size. - moe_training: MoE Where It Changes the Design Space - Mixture-of-Experts work that opens or closes a design axis: differentiable and stable routing, the training/inference router gap, expert collapse, granularity and layout as a new axis, dense-to-MoE conversion, and MoE scaling laws that fix one quantity and vary another. MoE systems and inference work is out. - efficiency_scaling: Efficiency, Compression, and Large-Scale Training - Compression, sparsity, quantization, pruning, low-rank and memory or cache efficiency whose mechanism is new and whose gain is unconditional.

Papers

[PAPER LIST HERE]

Instructions

Respond in JSONL. Output exactly one JSON object per paper, one per line:

{"ARXIVID":"...","COMMENT":"...","RELEVANCE":0,"NOVELTY":0,"EVIDENCE":0,"LOAD":0,"PROXIMITY":0,"PRIMARY_TOPIC_ID":"...","MATCHED_TOPIC_IDS":[],"TOPIC_MATCH_COMMENT":"...","HOTSPOT_PAPER_TAGS":[],"HOTSPOT_PAPER_COMMENT":"..."}

Rules: - ARXIVID: the arXiv ID. - COMMENT: identify the single strongest matching criterion. Be brief and specific. Do not rely on generic phrases like "language modeling" or "advancement". Do not mention non-matching criteria. - RELEVANCE: integer from 1 to 10. - NOVELTY: integer from 1 to 10, scoring the claim as stated. - EVIDENCE: integer from 1 to 10, scoring whether the demonstration reaches as far as the claim. - LOAD: integer from 1 to 10, scoring what it costs the reader to extract the usable result. - PROXIMITY: integer from 1 to 10, scoring distance from the stated Active Lines. - PRIMARY_TOPIC_ID: exactly one stable topic ID from the allowed topic registry. - MATCHED_TOPIC_IDS: zero or more stable topic IDs from the same allowed set. Include PRIMARY_TOPIC_ID when there are multiple matches. - TOPIC_MATCH_COMMENT: briefly explain why the primary topic is the best fit. - HOTSPOT_PAPER_TAGS: zero or more tags from this exact set only: daily_hot, new_frontier. - HOTSPOT_PAPER_COMMENT: briefly explain why the paper belongs in the daily hotspot paper feed when HOTSPOT_PAPER_TAGS is non-empty; otherwise use an empty string. - Use HOTSPOT_PAPER_TAGS sparingly. Most papers should return []. - daily_hot means the paper feels broadly important to the day and belongs in the daily hotspot paper section even if it is not part of the personalized foundational reading list. - new_frontier means the paper appears to open a genuinely new direction, paradigm, or field, even if the work is still early. - Do not output markdown, code fences, or any extra text.