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 6, 2026

cs.AI

On the Reliability of Majority-Vote Pseudo-Labels in Test-Time Reinforcement Learning

Haoyu Wang, Ru Wang, Yuanyuan Wang and 2 more

Test-time reinforcement learning (TTRL) adapts pretrained language models to unlabeled target-domain data using self-generated pseudo-labels, whose reliability remains poorly understood. We analyze majority-vote supervision for TTRL with online Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and decompose its error into population-majority bias and prompt-dependent finite-rollout variation. Because population-majority bias is generally unidentifiable without external supervision, we focus on mitigating the downstream effects of finite-rollout variation. We propose \emph{Prompt-Conditional Distributionally Robust DPO (PC-Dr.DPO)}, which conditions within-prompt robust reweighting on observed vote reliability to make updates from sampling-sensitive prompts more conservative. We further introduce a cache-based mechanism to reduce self-supervised forgetting during online adaptation. Across six mathematical and knowledge-intensive reasoning benchmarks and five model backbones, PC-Dr.DPO matches or outperforms the strongest TTRL baseline in 24 of 30 settings.

#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

Flow-Guided Target-Space Alignment via Path Consistency

Ruizhi Yuan, Zeqiu Yu, Wei Gao and 3 more

Many multimodal alignment problems require mapping a source modality into a fixed space defined by a target modality, where the target space is not merely an intermediate embedding but is used directly for downstream analysis. In this setting, successful alignment should preserve both the global structure of the target distribution and the instance-level correspondence observed in paired source--target training data. Existing objectives typically address only part of this goal: contrastive losses encourage relative similarity, distribution-matching losses improve marginal agreement, and pointwise regression fits each source sample to its paired target without explicitly modeling target-space path geometry. We propose FlowAlign, a flow-guided target-space alignment method that repurposes conditional flow matching as a training-time alignment signal rather than an inference-time transport model. FlowAlign uses the learned flow field to guide the alignment of source-side representations with the fixed target space, encouraging them to preserve paired correspondence while remaining compatible with the global target-space structure. We further provide theoretical analysis showing how FlowAlign helps improve paired correspondence by controlling endpoint accuracy and capturing local target-space geometry. Experiments on synthetic data, paired single-cell multiome benchmarks, and image--text alignment demonstrate that FlowAlign improves instance level correspondence while preserving target-space structure across different modality settings.

#04Nov 6, 2026

cs.LG

The Cost of Coverage: Conformalising Native Forecast Uncertainty for GB Wind Power

Carl Somers

Uncertainty bands on wind forecasts help inform reserve sizing and commitments, but often fail to deliver their stated coverage. We apply conformal prediction to native bands to see what it adds and what it costs, comparing six forecasters, from ARIMA to a tabular foundation model, at two wind farms in Great Britain (GB) under operational conditions. We show that calibration repairs empirical marginal coverage with little or no Winkler Score penalty, but this apparent success conceals under-coverage in high winds. Calibrating by forecast wind regime turns marginal coverage into regime-level coverage, cutting day-ahead out-of-band volume in high winds by over 40% relative to pooled calibration while narrowing bands overall.

#05Nov 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.