#01Nov 5, 2026
cs.CL
Measured Coupling for Parallel Decoding in Diffusion Language Models
Tal Oved, Lior Wolf
Diffusion language models can write many tokens per step, but must choose which tokens are safe to commit together. Mean-field decoding penalizes pairs of positions whose predictions look alike. We replace this proxy with the coupling itself: how much committing one token changes the model's confidence at another. Cheap probes inside the main forward pass measure it, with no training or extra model, and it plugs into the same mean-field rule. On three models and four benchmarks, our method needs far fewer steps than mean-field decoding and is faster in most settings, also with a key-value cache, at an average accuracy cost of 1.1 points. Shuffling the couplings or replacing them with a uniform bonus loses this gain.
#02Nov 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.
#03Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
Synthesis of Ovarian Cancer Multi-Omics Datasets: A Biology-Informed Evaluation Framework
Déborah Boyenval, Alina Malyutina, Jaana Oikkonen and 2 more
Paired multi-omic cancer cohorts are costly to assemble and difficult to share, motivating synthetic cohorts as a complementary resource. As generative model development accelerates, we shift the focus from proposing yet another architecture to defining evaluation criteria that determine whether synthetic data preserve biologically relevant structure. We introduce a biology-informed and patient-disjoint framework for evaluating the generation of paired RNA expression and copy-number variation (CNV) profiles, and apply it to the longitudinal DECIDER high-grade serous ovarian cancer cohort. The framework assesses modality-specific fidelity and coherence between RNA and CNV pairs using agreement between real training and held-out data as a reference, alongside complementary training-data proximity diagnostics. We adapt three multi-omic integration architectures based on variational autoencoders to generate paired profiles. The model leading several fidelity and coherence measures also shows the strongest training-data proximity. The protocol and case study offer the community a reference for comparing future multi-omic generators.
#04Nov 5, 2026
cs.AI
Benchmarking Large Language Models on Heterogeneous Cognitive and Biomedical Knowledge Graphs: The Role of Graph Grounding in Multi-Hop Reasoning and Hallucination Mitigation
Ali Sarabadani, Kheirolah Rahsepar Fard, Tahereh Jeirani
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in biomedical and cognitive neuroscience, but their ability to reason reliably over heterogeneous knowledge graphs (KGs) remains unclear. We benchmark five LLMs (GPT-5.1, Gemini 2.0 Pro, Llama 3, Qwen, and BioGPT) across five KGs: DrugBank, NeuroSynth, Cognitive Atlas, Brain Map, and GDPKG. We introduce a multitier query dataset to evaluate reasoning depth and factual accuracy under KG-aware (graph-grounded) and KG-agnostic conditions. Inter-annotator agreement was substantial, with Cohen's kappa of 0.781 (range: 0.753-0.807) and Fleiss' kappa of 0.77. Results show that general-purpose models, particularly GPT-5.1 and Gemini 2.0 Pro, generally outperform domain-specific models on multi-hop and high-level reasoning tasks, although performance declines as query complexity increases. KG grounding reduces hallucination rates across all evaluated models. Contrary to our initial hypothesis, domain-specific models do not consistently outperform general-purpose models on specialized tasks without graph grounding. These findings highlight the value of combining broad language-model capabilities with structured domain knowledge. We provide practical guidance for selecting LLM-KG integration strategies based on task complexity and computational constraints, and discuss hybrid neurosymbolic architectures for personalized medicine, cognitive disorder diagnosis, and explainable AI.
#05Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
Adversarial Training with Large Step Sizes: Implicit Bias, Optimization, and Sharpness
Yi Feng, Andrea Paudice
Adversarial Training (AT) is an important method for improving model robustness. We study the dynamics of deterministic Gradient Descent (GD) in AT. Most existing works in this direction focus on the small or vanishing step sizes regime, where GD resembles a continuous-time flow. However, such step sizes can make training inefficient and are rarely used in practice. In this paper, we study the AT dynamics of GD with large constant step sizes. We first study GD in adversarial linear logistic regression, focusing on two aspects: where the model parameters converge (implicit bias) and how quickly the losses decrease (optimization). We then turn to neural networks training and study how the sharpness of losses evolve during AT. Our results advance the understanding of the behaviors of GD with large step sizes in AT and highlight three key differences from its behavior in Standard Training (ST): (i) the implicit bias gap between AT and ST, previously established only for small step sizes, persists for arbitrarily large constant step sizes, (ii) different from ST, there is no uniform rate of convergence for the optimization error in AT, and (iii) sharpness can exhibit two-stage dynamics that differ from the Edge-of-Stability behavior observed in ST.