#01Nov 6, 2026
cs.AI
BitDecoding-FP4: Native FP4 KV Cache Decoding via Algorithm-System Co-Design
Dayou Du, Woon Yee Ng, Guangming Sheng and 3 more
The key-value (KV) cache dominates memory capacity and bandwidth in long-context LLM serving. While 4-bit microscaling formats (NVFP4, MXFP4) shrink the cache and run attention on FP4 Tensor Cores, a fundamental gap remains between algorithmic quantization and system-aware acceleration: existing FP4 KV systems use vanilla quantization that causes severe accuracy drops, whereas accuracy-oriented 4-bit algorithms rely on vector codebooks whose lookup overhead degrades decoding throughput. We present BitDecoding-FP4, an algorithm--system co-design for accurate and efficient native FP4 KV decoding. We mitigate three error sources: Dual-Residual Query Quantization splits queries into two FP4 tensors, cutting query logit error from 60% to 1%; Underflow-Aware Probability Scaling prevents E4M3 scales from rounding long-context probabilities to zero; and Outlier-Aware Key Quantization combines static smoothing, Hadamard rotation, and scale search to suppress key outliers under token-wise scaling. At the system level, we remove the softmax bottleneck via transposed softmax with fused probability quantization and stacked query MMA on paged KV caches. Across dense and MoE models with GQA and MLA, BitDecoding-FP4 stays within 0.5 points of BF16 KV accuracy with NVFP4 (1 point with MXFP4), and tracks BF16 KV in RL training rollouts. In end-to-end serving on NVIDIA B300 with Qwen3-4B and Qwen3-30B-A3B, it delivers 2.4-3.0$\times$ higher peak serving throughput than BF16 KV. The implementation is available at https://github.com/OpenBitSys/BitDecoding-FP4.
#02Nov 6, 2026
hep-lat
Machine learning for lattice QCD
Gurtej Kanwar, Scott Lawrence, Alessandro Nada and 1 more
Machine learning (ML) methods have been explored as a means of optimizing lattice field theory calculations, with increasing interest in recent years. This chapter gives an introduction and summary to the use of ML methods to optimize lattice field theory without introducing any uncontrolled approximations. We focus on those directions which are clearly established as of late 2025, marking the 50th anniversary of the beginning of the study of lattice gauge theory. This chapter is a contribution to the online book ``Lattice QCD at 50 years,'' (LQCD@50), edited by Tanmoy Bhattacharya, Maarten Golterman, Rajan Gupta, Laurent Lellouch, and Steve Sharpe.
#03Nov 6, 2026
cs.AI
Test-Time Compute Scales Better with Parallel Agent Teams
Junlin Wang, Haozhe Chen, Ang Li and 2 more
Test-time scaling improves the performance of a fixed model by spending more computation at inference. There are two common ways to spend it on agents when a verifier can score every attempt. Best-of-N sampling runs many independent agents and keeps the best result but saturates quickly. One large team of collaborating agents can score higher but stops improving as it grows. Can we get the best of both? Our method, parallel agent teams, does so by sampling many small teams in parallel and keeping the best team's result. We test it on 12 long-horizon tasks from GPU kernels and formal proofs to exploit development. With a 27B model and a budget of 100 agents, parallel teams of ten beat parallel agents on 10 of 12 tasks and beat one team of 100 on all four tasks where we ran such large teams. At equal dollar cost the same parallel teams beat a frontier model on half the tasks. A simple statistical model shows that individual agents lose because their many samples have a low mean and that one large team loses because a single sample gets no gain from variance. Sampling many small teams in parallel balances a high mean with the gain from variance. Parallel agent teams thus offer a more effective way to scale test-time compute.
#04Nov 6, 2026
cs.AI
Maya a1: Do the Options Read the Model, or Does Their Position? Order Sensitivity in a Non-Autoregressive Decision Model
Mohammed Nayeem Khan, Logesh L
Laya answers typed multiple-choice questions in one forward pass by scoring a hidden state at one [MASK] marker per option. We re-engineer the checkpoint (421M parameters; a 2-layer option head with no positional tensor; a documented but unused parallel layout) and test whether the answer depends on where an option is listed. Presenting 951 Qwen-verified questions under every cyclic rotation of their options (or six random permutations for 12 options), the released checkpoint changes its answer for 25.8% [22.9-28.7] of questions (19.7% on the 605 English-language items alone); accuracy with the gold option first versus last differs by 10.1 points, and the flips concentrate where the model's own confidence is low (54% versus 8% across confidence terciles). Fine-tuning with Laya's trainer on 2,818 teacher-verified rows with option shuffling cuts the flip rate to 7.2%; the identical rows without shuffling give 11.4%, so shuffling is responsible for 4.2 points of the improvement. A confidence-weighted vote over orderings gives 69.7% against 69.1% for a single base pass at 4.1x the compute. Labels are LLM-made and the test sets are teacher-filtered. We also fine-tune with the authors' parallel layout on the same rows: flip rate 0.5%.
#05Nov 6, 2026
cs.CV
GRAC: Graph-Based Retrieval-Augmented Captioning for Surgical Scene Description
Rochak Dhakal, Chen Zhao, Soup Cobb and 3 more
Purpose: Surgical operative reports support procedural documentation, surgical training, performance assessment, and workflow review. However, extracting meaningful information often requires extensive manual review and clinical expertise. Automated surgical scene descriptions could reduce this burden by leveraging recurring surgical activities and prior knowledge. Methods: We propose GRAC (Graph-Based Retrieval-Augmented Captioning), a framework that represents surgical scenes as graphs capturing relationships among instruments, actions, and anatomical structures. Given an input scene graph, GRAC learns to retrieve relevant graph-caption pairs from training data. It compares instrument-tissue interactions between retrieved examples and the input scene, using comparison features to condition retrieved-caption representations during generation. Results: On the EndoVis-18 benchmark, GRAC achieved a CIDEr-D of 5.88, compared with 4.23 for SGT and 3.36 for the strongest conventional Transformer baseline. Exact instrument-action-target triplet-set accuracy reached 52.6%, compared with 32.7% for SGT and 26.2% for the strongest conventional baseline. These results demonstrate improvements in language quality and factual agreement. On TORS, GRAC achieved a CIDEr-D of 5.06, compared with 3.80 for the strongest baseline. Conclusion: GRAC demonstrates that combining structured surgical scene representations with retrieved examples improves surgical scene captioning and produces more contextually meaningful descriptions.