#01Aug 31, 2026
cs.CL
The First Token Is a Clue: Verbalizing Multi-Token Concepts from the J-lens
Xijie Gong, Tonghan Wang
The Jacobian Lens (J-lens) is a recent tool for interpreting LLMs. It reads a hidden state as a ranked list of vocabulary tokens, leaving multi-token concepts without a representation of their own. The original J-lens work addresses this limitation with Template Lens, which precomputes vectors for a fixed phrase vocabulary, and Oracle Lens, which fine-tunes components to propose phrases and reconstruct phrase vectors. We ask whether multi-token concepts and their vectors can instead be recovered directly from J-lens and the frozen model. We find that the first token of a multi-token concept is about as readable as a single-token concept. Given the correct first token and source prompt, the frozen model recovers the second token in 88.3% of two-token cases. We show that a vector for the complete concept can be recovered from subsequent hidden states in a single forward pass. We therefore use J-lens to propose first tokens and let the frozen model complete candidate concepts. We then recover a vector for each candidate and score it alongside the complete vocabulary. Across 496 multi-hop clozes on Gemma-3-12B-IT, Llama-3.1-8B, and Qwen3-14B, our method achieves an average $\mathrm{Rank@}10$ of 43.1%, compared with 27.6% for Template Lens. Without the J-lens clue, performance drops to 21.6%, showing that the first-token clue substantially improves readout. Causal concept swaps using the recovered vectors achieve an average $\mathrm{succ}@10$ of 61.4%, compared with 26.2% for Template Lens under the same intervention. These results show that first-token clues can guide multi-token concept recovery, while subsequent hidden states provide vectors for readout and intervention.
#02Aug 31, 2026
cs.SE
Auditing Anonymous AI Models: A Four-Stage Protocol for Black-Box Identity Verification
Yisen Xi
The 2025--2026 AI market has seen a wave of stealth releases: frontier models launched anonymously on developer platforms under codenames. For their users, identity determines data-handling terms, supply-chain risk, and capability expectations. No validated methodology exists for black-box identity verification of anonymous models: practitioner checklists lack accuracy evidence, and self-identification is untrustworthy by design. We propose a four-stage forensic audit protocol for API-served models. Stage 0 reconstructs launch-time configuration from archived platform snapshots (Internet Archive), exposing preview--production drift. Stage 1 fingerprints configuration (context, output ceiling, reasoning, modality) against the platform catalog. Stage 2 tests tokenizer identity with a cross-length differential that rejects short-prompt collisions. Stage 3 corroborates with behavioral probes. We test declaration consistency on 10 known-identity releases (7 exact, 2 precision-differences, 1 partial, 0 counter-directional), not end-to-end identification under anonymity. Identification is validated prospectively on a flagship case whose 2026-08-23 analysis pointed to the GLM-5.3 version line and whose official reveal confirmed those family and version-line inferences (deployment variant was not pre-asserted; Flash was consistent post-reveal), and on three Stage-0-only cases where the protocol produced a graded hypothesis or declined rather than guessed. A standard-library-only implementation is provided as supplementary material.
#03Aug 31, 2026
cs.CL
S3Gym: Can LLMs Turn Self-Testing and Self-Judging into Self-Improvement?
Jiajun Shi, Siyuan Tao, Yuhao Wu and 18 more
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly interact with external environments and accumulate substantial behavioral experience, yet existing agent benchmarks largely evaluate them as fixed policies. It therefore remains unclear whether an agent can actively test its behavior, judge the resulting experience, and use that experience to improve future decisions. We introduce \textbf{S\textsuperscript{3}Gym}, an interactive benchmark for evaluating LLM self-improvement through three coupled capabilities: \textbf{Self-Testing}, \textbf{Self-Judging}, and \textbf{Self-Improvement}. S$^3$Gym separates permissive exploration from strict held-out evaluation and instantiates this protocol in seven text-based games with executable environment verifiers. We evaluate three pathways for incorporating interaction experience: direct History ICL, score-conditioned Summary Memory, and parameter Training. Our experiments reveal that self-improvement is neither automatic nor uniform. Context-level experience improves performance for several model--game pairs, but the most effective pathway depends strongly on the task structure: summaries are beneficial when experience can be compressed into reusable strategic rules, yet often underperform raw history when success depends on precise, state-contingent information. Parameter training produces substantial gains on some tasks, but also exhibits unstable improvement and severe negative transfer on others. These findings show that recognizing successful actions is insufficient; agents must also transform feedback into executable and transferable policies. S$^3$Gym provides a unified framework for diagnosing this process and identifying the bottlenecks that prevent agents from translating interaction experience into reliable self-improvement.
#04Aug 31, 2026
quant-ph
"Train classical, deploy quantum" requires rethinking generalization
Snehal Raj, Natansh Mathur, Alejandro Perdomo-Ortiz
Generative models have become central across science and industry, from image and text synthesis to the design of molecules and materials. Quantum generative models are considered one of the most promising applications for quantum computers, since a quantum circuit naturally produces samples from the distribution it encodes, and for suitable circuits that distribution is believed to be hard for any classical computer to reproduce. A leading strategy trains these models on a classical computer and reserves the quantum device for generating samples at deployment. This is possible when the training loss can be evaluated on a classical computer. A prime example is the maximum mean discrepancy (MMD$^2$), a moment-matching loss that compares the model and the data through their Pauli-$Z$ correlations. Research so far has asked whether such models can be trained and whether their sampling is hard; whether minimizing such an objective yields a model that generalizes, rather than one that merely reproduces the training statistics, remains poorly understood. We benchmark a broad set of quantum and classical generative models by direct sampling and show that models trained with a moment-matching loss generally show worse generalization than the likelihood-trained models. We show this on two application-inspired datasets: first a cardinality-constrained dataset at up to $30$ qubits and second a dataset of genomic single-nucleotide variants, whose valid set is the observed data. These results indicate that a converged moment-matching loss is not a reliable measure of generalization, and that train-classical, deploy-quantum workflows will need approaches that target generalization directly, leaving open whether better training objectives suffice or whether the model architectures themselves must change.
#05Aug 31, 2026
cs.CL
Aspire: Can Models Self-Evolve from Vague Goals?
Yuhao Wu, Jingyuan Zhang, Jiajun Shi and 18 more
Many important forms of human learning begin with a vague goal, such as "become a better physicist" or "improve at research." Learners must interpret the goal, identify capability gaps, decide how to learn, and determine whether they have actually improved. In contrast, existing work on LLM self-evolution typically begins with tasks and evaluation metrics specified by humans, reducing self-evolution to optimizing an explicit objective rather than deciding what and how to learn. We introduce ASPIRE, a benchmark for vague-goal-driven self-evolution. ASPIRE provides only a natural-language capability goal while downstream evaluation tasks remain hidden. The agent must operationalize the goal by choosing data and update methods, constructing training and validation signals, and deciding when to evaluate. ASPIRE supports both model-weight and agent-harness evolution in a unified interactive environment and evaluates the resulting systems on a hidden, expert-authored set of 520 items spanning six goals. Our experiments show that vague goals redirect search effort toward goal interpretation. Current agents routinely complete training and harness-editing loops, but weight-level gains remain sparse and unstable, and the strongest evolved harness remains below the engineered Qwen-Agent reference. Agents often train on mismatched data and trust narrow self-evaluations, so local gains fail to transfer to hidden evaluation and continued search and training can erase earlier improvements.