#01Nov 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.
#02Nov 5, 2026
stat.ML
Unifying Central Flow, Rod Flow, and the Edge Coupling
Eric Regis, Sinho Chewi
At the edge of stability, the iterates of gradient descent oscillate along the sharp directions of the Hessian. This poses a significant challenge for continuous-time models as the usual continuous-time approximation -- the gradient flow -- admits no oscillations. Several continuous-time models have been proposed to capture the behavior at the edge of stability, among them central flow and rod flow. Although both models can be interpreted as performing a coarse-graining in time, the connection between them remains poorly understood. Here we show that both flows can be derived from a third object, the edge coupling: a functional on consecutive iterates whose critical points are the fixed points and period-two orbits of gradient descent. It is revealed that the two flows correspond to coarse-grainings at different time scales. Rod flow coarse-grains over only the fastest time scale, while central flow coarse-grains over both the fast and intermediate time scales. Furthermore, using the edge coupling, we derive rod flows and central flows for momentum methods such as heavy ball and Adam. We verify the derived flows experimentally on representative neural network architectures, where they track the discrete iterates throughout all phases of training -- including the transition from the stable regime to the edge of stability.
#03Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
Towards interpreting any residual stream direction by scaling activation inversion
Celeste De Schamphelaere, Juan J. Vazquez, Ari Spiesberger and 4 more
To interpret a direction in a language model's residual stream, we can look for text that strongly activates it. But when such text is found by scanning a corpus, it is limited to what that corpus contains. We develop Maximally-Activating Example Metamodels (MAEMs), language models which map residual stream directions from a subject model to text exemplars that strongly activate those directions. Our objective is to maximise the cosine similarity of a supplied residual stream direction with the activations of the text generated by the MAEM. This label-free RL objective helps to scale MAEMs on diverse sources of residual stream directions. Empirically, we find the resultant metamodel produces informative exemplars: a Qwen3.6-27B MAEM inverts held-out activations better than corpus search or a natural-language autoencoder (NLA), beats corpus search (at 10M tokens) on a majority of held-out languages/domains, and activates 89% of held-out SAE features. It also identifies concepts behind steering vectors about as well as NLAs, recovers the payloads of LoRA backdoors more often than corpus search, and can even verbalise some model workspace inner monologue. Unlike explanations produced by other metamodels (e.g. NLAs), MAEM exemplars can be verified with a forward pass on the subject model, making the MAEM objective a grounded alternative for scaling the training of metamodels.
#04Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
A Hidden Markov Preference Model for Online Prediction of Adversary Actions
Angel Daruna, Michael Cogswell, Tixiao Shan and 3 more
A defender anticipating an attacker needs a probability distribution over the attacker's next action from information available before that action occurs. Two structures complicate this: the attacker's behavioral regime persists and can switch within an episode, and each action combines an operation with state-dependent arguments whose feasible values change over time. We capture both with a hidden Markov model whose latent state is the active regime and whose regime-conditioned action law is defined on a feasibility-masked tree of executable actions. The same likelihood forms the next-action distribution and updates the regime belief once the action is seen, and a partially observed prefix contributes its resolved local factors. Estimation separates into convex logistic fits that Baum-Welch reuses when regimes are unlabeled. We derive a reach-weighted nodewise KL expression for regime information, a sequence-wise log-loss bound for switching regime paths, and a uniform fallback guarantee. On the CAGE 2 cyber defense benchmark the filtered latent state is worth 0.8 nats per step, and after a controller switch the loss begins to fall in three steps against ten for a recurrent baseline.
#05Nov 5, 2026
cs.LG
Spectral and Subspace Dynamics of LoRA in Supervised Fine-Tuning and Reinforcement Learning
Chenruo Liu, Zihan Wang, Yijun Dong and 1 more
Low-rank adaptation (LoRA) is commonly used in both supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL), often under similar optimizer settings. Yet, how the different dynamics of the two stages manifest in the low-rank increment that LoRA optimizes remains unclear. Tracking the singular spectrum and subspaces of LoRA updates on mathematical reasoning tasks, we find that RL concentrates the spectrum at every learning rate, while SFT expands it at moderate learning rates; moreover, RL rotates the singular subspaces much faster than SFT at small learning rates. Interpolating between SFT and RL one ingredient at a time, we pinpoint group-mean baseline subtraction as the source of both contrasts. A quadratic multi-index model updated via LoRA unveils the underlying mechanism: group-mean baseline subtraction tilts the balance between two competing forces, coherent fitting and gradient noise, toward spectral concentration and faster subspace rotation, while forcing the risk-favorable learning rate to be low. Guided by these dynamics, we tailor LoRA updates to each stage: in SFT, we flatten the spectrum of the full update to spread adaptation across singular directions, whereas in RL, we flatten the part of the update outside the current LoRA increment span to promote subspace rotation. Experiments on mathematical reasoning tasks across multiple models show that the respective configurations for SFT and RL yield the best performance among the compared methods in most evaluated settings.