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 4, 2026

cs.LG

Systolic Linear Attention: Co-Designing Tile-Grouped Gated Delta Attention for TPUs

Gagik Amirkhanyan, Nuojin Cheng

Gated-delta linear attention layers such as Gated DeltaNet (GDN), Kimi Delta Attention (KDA), and GDN-2 are tuned for GPUs, where small tensor-core tiles and fast vector registers make per-channel decay rescaling and sequential in-block solves cheap. On Google TPUs, which concentrate compute in wide $256 \times 256$ systolic matrix units backed by a slower vector unit, porting these layers directly leaves half of each matrix tile empty and bottlenecks on vector operations. We present \textbf{Systolic Linear Attention (SLA)}, which reshapes gated delta attention around the matrix unit by widening keys to $256$ with grouped value heads, grouping decay gates into four $64$-channel tiles, and computing the chunk solve entirely with block matrix products in a single fused kernel. On TPU v7x, a full \texttt{SLA-R4} layer runs $1.6\times$--$2.5\times$ faster than the open-source Tokamax KDA kernel ($1.4\times$--$2.4\times$ with exact chunk inversion), driven primarily by head sharing and kernel fusion. Across a $2{,}048$-chip TPU v7x pre-training study of sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models from $6.5\text{B}$ to $63.1\text{B}$ parameters, SLA trains $11\%$--$24\%$ faster than KDA at similar perplexity, and reaches slightly lower perplexity than KDA in smaller matched-seed runs.

#02Nov 4, 2026

cs.CV

Coupled Scene Graph Anticipation: When With-Constraint Recall Hides Structural Inconsistency

Zeno Nongmaithem, Anushttha Srivastava, Anshit Sinha and 4 more

Scene Graph Anticipation (SGA) predicts object relationships in future video frames. Continuous-time SGA models evolve each subject-object pair with an independent Neural ODE, so relationships sharing an entity cannot influence one another during integration, and nothing prevents mutually exclusive predictions, such as "sitting on" and "standing on", for the same pair. We introduce CoupledSGA, which links such relationships through a Relationship Interaction Graph with graph attention inside the ODE vector field, and adds a Structural Consistency Loss ($\mathcal{L}_{SC}$) based on a matrix of mutually exclusive predicates. Developing CoupledSGA revealed a limitation of the evaluation protocol. With-Constraint evaluation keeps one predicate per group for each subject-object pair, so its R@K and mR@K cannot capture the within-group violations targeted by $\mathcal{L}_{SC}$: we prove they are unchanged whenever each group's winning predicate and its score are held fixed. We further show that the gradient of $\mathcal{L}_{SC}$ depends on predicate scores rather than ground-truth labels: for two-predicate rules it amplifies the ordering the model already holds, and when all scores in a group are equal it suppresses predicates in more exclusion rules more strongly, explaining why the penalty can lower recall while improving consistency. On Action Genome, activating $\mathcal{L}_{SC}$ after two warm-up epochs reduces R@20 from 42.21% to 35.18% while lowering the No-Constraint contradiction rate from 45.92% to 4.07% (matched-budget R@20: 40.48% CoupledSGA vs. 44.78% SceneSayerODE). CoupledSGA is a testbed, not a state-of-the-art claim: With-Constraint recall captures the cost of enforcing structural consistency but not the improvement. We recommend reporting No-Constraint results alongside a contradiction rate for methods that constrain predicate co-activation.

#03Nov 4, 2026

cs.LG

FedFiOT: Fisher-Weighted Optimal Transport for Model Merging in One-Shot and Few-Round Federated Learning

Quan Minh Nguyen, Hoang M. Ngo, Bhakti Chowkwale and 2 more

One-shot and few-round federated learning (FL) reduce communication burden by constructing a global model within one or a few communication rounds, but often achieve lower performance than conventional multi-round FL. Without frequent synchronization, client models may drift apart, causing neurons that learn similar features to occupy different positions across clients. At the same time, local data heterogeneity can cause corresponding parameters to differ in their importance to each client's predictions. Together, these challenges cause direct averaging to combine mismatched neurons and assign equal weight to parameters despite differences in their importance. We propose FedFiOT, a Fisher-weighted optimal transport framework for one-shot and few-round FL that leverages Fisher information to quantify parameter importance and guide neuron alignment and model aggregation. FedFiOT jointly optimizes neuron correspondences and global model parameters through alternating minimization of a shared Fisher-weighted objective. Theoretically, we show that FedFiOT's optimization procedure monotonically decreases the layer-wise merging objective and establish a stationarity bound that quantifies the effects of client heterogeneity and nonuniform Fisher weighting.Experiments across multiple datasets demonstrate consistent improvements over competing baselines in both one-shot and few-round federated learning settings.

#04Nov 4, 2026

cs.CV

Same Layout, Different Count: What Number Words Do Past Ten in Text-to-Image Models

Liang Yue, Eric A. Vance

Ask SD3.5-Medium for twelve of an object and then, from the same starting noise, for twenty-five. The picture keeps its layout, but the count changes about as much as it would under a new random seed, and in no consistent direction. We study what number words do once a request passes about ten objects, in five open text-to-image models. Holding the object and the starting noise fixed, we change one thing at a time, and people who never see the request count 3,088 of the images. Every model follows the number for small crowds, but only up to a point, its reach: SD3.5-M and FLUX.1-dev stop following it soon after ten, while FLUX.2 [klein] and Qwen-Image follow it loosely up to twenty-five. Beyond SD3.5-M's reach, the coarse part of the starting noise fixes the composition of the picture but not how many objects it holds: redrawing only the noise finer than an eighth of the image keeps the layout as well as a new number does, and already moves the count two-thirds as far. The number word still reaches the denoiser and acts in its first steps, but nothing we tried gives it a clear direction. Shown instead as a noised grid in the starting latent, the count is drawn: people find it in 59% of images, against 4% when it is only told. Past ten, an exact-match score barely separates a model that follows the number loosely from one that ignores it, and a relative-error score can even prefer a constant guess of sixteen. A same-noise test with a few requests per object tells them apart.

#05Nov 4, 2026

physics.flu-dyn

FlowReconBench: Accuracy, calibration and cost of learned and classical flow reconstruction from sparse sensors

Nicolas Tricard, Linzheng Wang, Jason Chen and 1 more

Reconstructing full flow fields from sparse sensors requires prior assumptions about unmeasured regions and physical variables. Yet it remains unclear when learned models outperform classical estimators and which aspects of their predictions can be trusted. FlowReconBench evaluates ten learned and five classical methods on three regimes: a laminar cylinder wake across Reynolds numbers, two-dimensional Kolmogorov turbulence and a large-scale three-dimensional (3D) isotropic turbulence. Methods share leakage-controlled splits and sensor draws and are scored on per-channel error, ensemble spread, calibration, spectra and cost. The leading method changes for each regime. Classical methods perform strongly in low-order and dense-sensing regimes. On the cylinder wake, linear stochastic estimation and gappy proper orthogonal decomposition lead, including for unobserved pressure. In 3D, inverse-distance weighting matches the best learned methods on observed channels. Data-driven methods become superior at decreasing sensor density or poor sensor observability. On Kolmogorov flow, continuous ranked probability score and error yield different method rankings: generative models offer broader but underdispersed ensembles, while deterministic models prioritize pointwise error. Generative models balance this tradeoff through their sampler budget, with a larger budget improving ensemble quality at higher computational cost. In 3D, scaling tests demonstrate that queryable methods are flat in memory, while full-grid construction methods run out of memory. Observing only 2 of 4 fields leaves the problem kinematically underconstrained, yet a latent model can reproduce structural similarities to the ground truth.