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.LG

Designing Effective Monitor-Based Interventions for Mitigating Reward Hacking During RL

Aria Wong, Joshua Engels, Neel Nanda

Reinforcement learning (RL) rewards are notoriously difficult to design and control, often leading to the model learning unintended behaviors such as reward hacking. One potential solution is to monitor for reward hacking and penalize it when detected; however, training against a monitor could lead to evasive behavior, and our general understanding of how to apply monitors effectively during training is limited. To study how best to use monitors to mitigate reward hacking, we introduce and open source three realistic environments where Qwen3-4B reward hacks: a coding environment hackable via test overwriting, a medical chat environment hackable via sycophancy, and a biography generation environment hackable via hallucination. We first focus on the coding environment, where we find that: (1) models can learn to evade highly accurate monitors by exploiting systemic flaws in probes and LLM judges; (2) monitors that leak more learning signal during RL suppress reward hacking but are more often evaded; and (3) including easier problems in training can decrease reward hacking. We apply our findings to build better reward hacking monitors for the medical chat and biography generation environments that improve upon naive baselines to reduce reward hacking rates across seeds to before-training levels in some interventions. Our results demonstrate that our takeaways translate to new settings and that better monitor intervention designs are possible.

#02Nov 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.

#03Nov 6, 2026

cs.RO

On Agentic Manipulation Policies

Chen Chen, Omid Bagherieh, Naveen Nikamanth Appiah Balaji and 10 more

Recent work on robot manipulation has focused on specialist policies trained on demonstrations. We show that generalist AI models can control manipulators more reliably than specialist policies such as vision-language-action models (VLAs) and world-action models (WAMs). We systematically analyze agentic manipulation policies (AMPs), in which a generalist AI model commands the manipulator directly, adapting its actions as the task unfolds. We present AMP1, a reference harness that runs unchanged across single-arm, bimanual, and mobile manipulation. AMP1 achieves state-of-the-art results on the RoboLab-120 and CaP-Gym benchmarks, with no demonstrations or task-specific training. On RoboLab-120, AMP1 reaches an 85.6\% success rate zero-shot, compared to 49.2\% and 42.9\% for leading VLA and WAM policies. The agent succeeds zero-shot in 104 of 108 real-world trials spanning twelve tasks and three robot instances, reducing failure rates by 20x and 15x relative to strong VLA and WAM baselines. The basic harness supplies no grasping, pushing, or placing skills; the agent develops its own strategies, such as searching for hidden objects, using objects as tools, and calibrating its cameras. With the addition of a persistent memory store, the agent can also learn from experience: an augmented harness with a memory representation that is carried across episodes lowers the failure rate on RoboDojo bimanual manipulation tasks by 4.6x relative to zero-shot deployment. Our analysis suggests that AMPs are substantially more general and robust than specialist manipulation policies, providing a promising foundation for robot manipulation.

#04Nov 6, 2026

cs.LG

Fifty-Two Shades of Pig: What the UCR Archive Really Asks Classifiers to Do

Omar Swelam, Jaris Küken, Shi Bin Hoo and 2 more

The pigs were bleeding. That was the point of the experiment: could airway pressure reveal hemorrhage before it became critical? In the UCR Time Series Classification Archive, the de facto benchmark for Time Series Classification (TSC), the same recordings ask a different question: "which of 52 pigs produced this trace?". The dataset PigAirwayPressure is not an outlier. Although the archive is the standard benchmark, whether its tasks resemble the problems TSC is meant to solve has rarely been examined. We find that several datasets are repurposed from their original task, built from toy setups, or have flawed test splits. We further question how representative the archive's ordered non-temporal sequences (e.g. spectra, shape outlines) are of real TSC, and the potential downsides from the decomposition of multivariate problems. Our findings call for more careful interpretation of archive-wide scores and greater attention to deployment-relevant evaluation. The audit is at https://github.com/automl/ucr-provenance-audit.

#05Nov 6, 2026

cs.RO

Grasp-TAGS: Task-Aware Grasp Selection via Critic Distillation for Prehensile Loco-Manipulation

Xun Tu, Minghao Zou, Karthik Desingh

Loco-manipulation, which requires mobile manipulators to coordinate locomotion and manipulation over long horizons, is a key capability for large-object rearrangement in applications such as service robotics and warehouse automation. Despite recent progress, reliably executing these tasks remains challenging because performance depends on complex robot-object and object-environment interaction dynamics. Existing approaches address this challenge either through model-based methods, which often require accurate dynamics models, or through learning-based methods, which reduce this requirement but typically assume a fixed or predefined initial grasp. However, different geometrically stable grasps can lead to substantially different downstream manipulation performance. Therefore, we propose Grasp-TAGS, a task-aware grasp selection framework for goal-conditioned large-object rearrangement. We train a unified PPO-based reinforcement learning policy across multiple initial grasp configurations and distill the learned critic into a lightweight grasp utility network that ranks candidate grasps using only the candidate grasp configuration and goal information. At inference time, we select the grasp with the highest predicted downstream utility for the downstream policy to complete the task, before even making a contact. Experiments demonstrate that Grasp-TAGS improves rearrangement success over both fixed single-grasp policies and random grasp selection, achieving an average success rate of 89.84% compared with 79.87% for the best-performing single-grasp policies, an improvement of 9.97 percentage points. Grasp-TAGS also reduces final orientation errors across all evaluated objects. For more qualitative results, refer to the supplementary webpage: https://rpm-lab-umn.github.io/Grasp-TAGS-web-page/