#01Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
Muir: Linear Attention with Sensitivity-Allocated Gating and Matched-Filter Readout
Tushaar Gangavarapu, Gil Tabak, Clemens JS Schaefer
Linear attention compresses context into a fixed-size key-value state for linear-time training and constant-memory inference. Gated delta-rule models decay this state and erase its prediction for an incoming key before writing a new value; Gated DeltaNet-2 (GDN-2) generalizes this with channel-wise decay and decoupled, full-rank erase and write gates. However, we show that state updates are far less sensitive to erasure than to writes: key activation and unit normalization concentrate key energy onto a sparse subset of channels, whereas value writes scale all channels, so the erase gate can be parameterized at lower rank. Furthermore, slow-decaying state rows accumulate much larger norms than fast rows, dominating unweighted readout and forcing stronger write-time erasure to suppress interference. Guided by this analysis, we introduce Muir, which fuses all gates into a sensitivity-allocated low-rank projection, re-weights state rows with a matched-filter readout gate, and reinvests the saved parameters in a wider feed-forward network. Because standard chunkwise algorithms become numerically unstable at the large chunk sizes needed to saturate wide matrix units, we design a parallel update for stable, efficient training. Across 166M-1.34B parameters, Muir lowers perplexity by 1.8-2.0% over GDN-2 and 2.5-3.6% over Transformer, raises commonsense accuracy by up to 1.9 points, and improves extractive recall over GDN-2. At 1.34B, Muir outperforms both baselines on multi-hop and multi-needle recall, extrapolates 2,560x from its 4K training length to 10M-token streams without perplexity drift, and maintains near-100% passkey retrieval to 1M tokens with static readout. Muir achieves these gains while matching GDN-2 throughput, reaching its 100B-token validation loss 1.2x faster, and training 2.7x faster than Transformer at 32K.
#02Nov 5, 2026
cs.RO
MOMASPLAT: Dynamic Novel-View Demonstration Augmentation for Mobile Manipulation
Sateesh Kumar, Arnav Balaji, Arpit Bahety and 3 more
Visuomotor policies trained through imitation learning are highly sensitive to changes in camera viewpoint. This is particularly problematic for mobile manipulation (MoMa), where robots rarely execute manipulation from the exact same base pose used during demonstration collection due to navigation uncertainty, localization drift, and environmental constraints. Recent approaches use novel-view synthesis (NVS) to augment demonstrations with unseen viewpoints, but they assume static scenes and therefore fail to re-render the manipulated object during the post-contact interaction phase, leaving the most critical parts of the demonstration unaugmented. We present MOMASPLAT, a novel-view demonstration augmentation framework for mobile manipulation that synthesizes full manipulation trajectories from unseen robot base poses, including dynamic object interactions. Our key insight is that standard MoMa data collection naturally provides the multiview observations needed to reconstruct both the static scene and the manipulated object in 3D. MOMASPLAT combines 3D Gaussian Splatting, feed-forward 3D foundation models, and kinematics-based action retargeting to separately reconstruct the scene and manipulated object, render them from novel viewpoints, and generate geometrically consistent synthetic demonstrations paired with transformed actions. We evaluate MOMASPLAT on five real-world mobile manipulation tasks involving both rigid and articulated objects across three scenes, and validate the fidelity of its synthesized demonstrations against ground truth in simulation. MOMASPLAT substantially improves robustness to unseen base poses, more than doubling the average success rate of the strongest baseline and maintaining non-trivial success at large base displacements where all baselines fail, while reducing the need for largescale real-world data collection.
#03Nov 5, 2026
cs.AI
The Gold Rush in AI4Math, II: What are signatures of AI-assisted Proofs?
Yuanchuan Guo, Jiashun Jin, Zheng Tracy Ke and 1 more
The growing use of AI in mathematics raises a question: can we detect AI involvement in proofs, separately from AI assistance with writing? Historical arXiv papers, recent papers disclosing substantive AI use, and manuscripts released by OpenAI provide a rich empirical basis for studying this question. However, several challenges remain: lack of matched case-control pairs; potential incompleteness of disclosure; and lack of ready-to-use features designed to capture signals of AI involvement in proofs. To address these challenges, we construct five cohorts comprising 8,281 papers by combining existing manuscripts with those we produced using generative AI. These cohorts span different levels of AI involvement and include matched pairs of papers addressing the same research problems. We then introduce ProofTrace, a framework that represents each paper as a graph of immediate proof support (GIPS) and extracts interpretable features of mathematical organization. Our study yields three discoveries. First, principal-component projections of our features reveal a qualitative gradient of AI involvement, where AI-reworded papers remain close to human papers, the two AI-generated cohorts depart in broadly shared directions, and papers disclosing substantive AI use occupy intermediate positions which shifts toward AI-generated cohorts over time. Second, we identify recurring signatures of AI-generated proofs, such as fewer externally cited results, greater reliance on intermediate conclusions, and altered graph connectivity; many of these signatures persist under controls for research field, manuscript length, or graph size. Finally, in a separate detection experiment, ProofTrace distinguishes human-written papers from those disclosing substantive AI use. Its performance remains stable under AI rewording, whereas the performance of state-of-the-art text-based detectors declines sharply.
#04Nov 5, 2026
cs.AI
Benchmarks as Software: Terminal-Bench and the Case for Continuous Benchmarks
E. Kelly Buchanan, Crystal Zhou, Scott W. Linderman and 1 more
Coding agents are among the most economically consequential deployments of LLMs to date, making reliable evaluation increasingly important. Yet even benchmarks that are carefully validated at release can become stale. As models improve, they can discover valid solutions that existing verifiers reject, while changes to evaluation infrastructure can invalidate assumptions embedded in tasks and tests. We call the resulting accumulation of defects benchmark maintenance debt: a growing gap between benchmark scores and the capabilities they are intended to measure. We introduce a continuous-validation workflow for agentic benchmarks that combines community reports, task artifacts, agent traces, automated oracle checks, and human-gated repairs. We apply this workflow to Terminal-Bench 2.0, a benchmark that underwent extensive human and LM-assisted review and red-teaming before release. Our audit identifies issues in roughly 30% of the benchmark, and we release the resulting repairs as Terminal-Bench 2.1. These repairs change evaluation results: accuracy increased by over 10 percentage points and leaderboard positions move by up to three ranks, even as the overall ranking remains highly correlated (Spearman rho = 0.958). We evaluate how resource allocation shapes benchmark conclusions. We show that fixed wall-clock can materially change agent performance: For example, extending the time limit closes a 20pp harness gap on GPT 5.4 and shrinks a 30 pp gap on GPT 5.4 mini to 5 pp. Benchmark maintenance is therefore not only about repairing task artifacts: resource budgets are part of the measurement specification and must be validated alongside the tasks themselves. More broadly, benchmark maintenance debt is not just accumulated implementation bugs: our results show that as models improve, both evaluation assumptions and resource settings may need to be revalidated.
#05Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
XStack: A Benchmark for ML Repo Migration
Linrong Cai, Taiming Lu, Haozhe Chen and 1 more
ML code should run where researchers choose, not where it was first written. Today, machine learning code mainly lives in two ecosystems, PyTorch on NVIDIA GPUs and JAX on Google TPUs. Migrating repositories between them means building and testing across frameworks and hardware. This migration is (1) a practical need, since it unlocks different hardware for researchers, and (2) a natural benchmark: it involves different frameworks and hardware, covers whole repositories, and is long-horizon and challenging. We introduce XStack, a benchmark that evaluates agents on migrating ML repositories between these two ecosystems. Each agent receives a PyTorch repository and a clean TPU machine and must deliver a JAX repository. Its output passes if it meets our grading criteria, based on the source repository's published result, authenticated and calibrated by us. Migration by agents remains unreliable: Claude Opus 5 passes 75%, GPT-5.6-sol 45%, and every other agent at most 40%. XStack is a step toward freeing ML code from its ecosystem. We release XStack to make progress toward reliable migration across frameworks and hardware measurable.