ML Reads

Personal arXiv list

ML papers to read today.

Pick a topic and keep a small daily list of papers worth opening.

Refresh queueDaily mix

Today's queue

5 papers

#01Nov 3, 2026

cs.AI

Adversarial Speculative Reasoning Improves Long Horizon Agents

Hongyin Luo, Wei Fang, Lijie Yang and 5 more

Speculative decoding has been treated purely as a systems optimization that speeds up large language model decoding without changing the model behavior. Under this view, the growing effort to train better draft models has been focused solely on acceptance rate. We argue that this view does not hold true for long-horizon agent reasoning. Measuring frontier open-weight models on complex agentic tasks with different speculative decoding approaches, we found that numerical noise grows within verification windows, and the draft acceptance results of the thinking process can change the output distribution of the model after 30 steps, thus noticeably influencing the reasoning accuracy of long-horizon agents in random directions. In this work, we improve the reasoning capability of target models by controlling such noise. While we cannot change the overall token distribution verified by the target model, we can encode critical reasoning with highest precision by training the draft model to be rejected. We identify these points in agent traces and train the draft model to favor adversarial preference. At inference the trained draft and the target part ways precisely at these decision points, verification restarts, so that critical thinking tokens are sampled from the target model and encoded under its least noisy conditions. This approach makes critical reasoning better indexed and more durable over a long horizon. On complex agentic coding benchmarks, our approach raises end-to-end success rate with no change to the target model or its output distribution. Our results recast the speculative decoding mechanism from a pure accelerator into an active allocator for context precision that improves the accuracy of long-horizon agents by training 0.06% to 0.28% of hosted parameters.

#02Nov 3, 2026

cs.LG

Agnostic Learning by Imitating

Sílvia Casacuberta, Parikshit Gopalan, Varun Kanade and 3 more

Given a class of machine learning models and sample access to a data distribution with binary labels, which computational task is harder: training a discriminative model that distinguishes positive and negative labels as well as the best member of the class, or training a generative model whose outputs are indistinguishable from real data by all members of the class? We prove that these two fundamental tasks in computational learning theory are not just closely related, but actually equivalent to each other in complexity. One direction of this equivalence was previously known. Indeed, the powerful regularity lemma in complexity theory gives an efficient oracle reduction from the indistinguishability task (a.k.a. multiaccuracy) to the distinguishing task (a.k.a. agnostic learning) in the style of boosting algorithms. Our main contribution is an efficient oracle reduction in the other direction. Taking this idea further, we show that a multiaccuracy oracle is a remarkably powerful primitive, achieving not just agnostic learning but also a wide range of seemingly more demanding learning objectives via similarly efficient and direct constructions. Our results crucially use the power of making adaptive queries to the oracle, and stand in stark contrast to prior work, which showed that post-processing a single multiaccurate predictor is insufficient for even weak forms of learning. On a technical level, we draw a connection between our (offline) problem and a version of no-regret learning in the online setting, which allows us to use follow-the-leader type algorithms to modify the label distribution and aggregate the predictions of the multiaccuracy oracle.

#03Nov 3, 2026

physics.med-ph

MedPhysBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Language Models on Medical Physics Calculations and Error Detection

Omar Nusrat

Medical physicists turn a prescription into a delivered dose and check one another's calculations, because one error in a beam calibration or a monitor-unit (MU) calculation can affect every patient treated with it. MedPhysBench has ten seeded generators of calculation items in radiation therapy, diagnostic imaging, nuclear medicine and radiation protection, up to clinical tasks such as a TG-51 calibration worksheet. Reference answers come from code implementing the governing protocols, and a grader converts units and applies tolerance bands. From the same inputs, separate checking items test error detection, showing a colleague's worksheet or only the colleague's result, half correct and half with one planted error. On a held-out test split of 1,200 items (half for two models), 12 models scored 33.3 to 100.0% on calculation. Of the nine answers graded incorrect for the four best (99.3-100.0%), five contained model errors and four followed NCRP Report 151 on points our items misstate or leave open. Below them, most models did worst on level-3 clinical tasks, and Claude Sonnet 5.5 omitted the inverse-square correction in 19 of 20 isocentric MU items. Five models detected at least 96.7% of mostly large planted errors with at most 4% false alarms; for four of the other seven, checking only the result raised false alarms significantly. In an exploratory targeted test with 20 public cases of an omitted inverse-square correction, the three best models tested caught it in every worksheet, and three weaker models accepted 16 to 18 of 20 planted worksheets, one of them while applying the correction in most of its own calculations. Claude Opus 5.5 accepted 6 of 20 wrong results, although it applied the correction in all 20 of its own. We report the effect of two problems in our shielding items, found after the runs, and release the code, per-item outcomes and targeted-test responses.

#04Nov 3, 2026

cs.RO

GUILD: Guided Iterative Data Collection for Imitation Learning

Shivin Dass, Kevin Nguyen, Rohan Yelandur and 2 more

Imitation learning policies in robotics are trained on datasets collected through costly real-world teleoperation. Often, the data-collection process is unguided, relying on the teleoperator's intuition, resulting in data that contributes little to overall policy performance. Recent work has shown that curating such unguided datasets can substantially improve policy performance, but these approaches operate by filtering existing datasets after collection and therefore do not prevent the acquisition of uninformative data. In this work, we propose GUILD, a novel Guided Data Collection (GDC) method that actively reasons about which data should be collected to maximize downstream policy performance. We introduce an iterative framework that alternates between 1) task proposal and data collection and 2) data evaluation to close the loop. For task proposal, we leverage semantic priors from vision-language models to identify relevant environments, object configurations, and goals for data collection. However, since semantic relevance does not imply policy improvement, we perform data evaluation. By leveraging predictive data attribution we approximate how the collected trajectories influence policy performance on a target deployment setting. This signal is then used as feedback to guide subsequent data collection, closing the data collection loop. We evaluate our approach in simulation and real robot settings, demonstrating that guided data collection substantially improves sample efficiency and deployment performance compared to passive data collection strategies, multiple baselines and experienced roboticists. More information at https://robin-lab.cs.utexas.edu/guild2026/

#05Nov 3, 2026

cs.LG

Stabilizing On-Policy Targeted Guidance in Agentic Reinforcement Learning

Kevin Frans, Alexander M Rush, Sergey Levine and 2 more

Naive on-policy RL is often bottlenecked by the capabilities of the base model --- insufficient coverage can result in an inability to learn from certain rewards. At the same time, rewards in modern post-training systems often come from rich textual sources, e.g. judge models with a rubric of criteria. Can we utilize such structures to provide a rich directional signal that enables improving on otherwise difficult to optimize rewards? In this work, we examine a framework we refer to as targeted guidance that learns from per-turn textual feedback via an on-policy self-distillation objective. Our focus is not only on directly improving hard-to-optimize behaviors, but on how to do so throughout the training process without degrading baseline RL performance. Over a range of settings across an agentic multi-turn software engineering environment, we find success by combining targeted self-distillation with a per-criteria RL reward, and by limiting feedback to turns where the policy specifically fails. We further examine the design choices that lead to stable entropy and reduce oscillatory behavior throughout training.