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 12, 2026

cs.AI

LiveGeo: Benchmarking Geographic Agents in Continuously Evolving Worlds

Pengcheng Zhou, Xuanyu Liu, Yanchen Yin and 6 more

We introduce GeoWorld, a controllable and continuously evolving geographic environment platform for LLM agents, and LiveGeo, a benchmark for evaluating reliable decision-making in real-world geographic environments using GeoWorld. Unlike existing evaluations that largely reason and plan over fixed geographic states, GeoWorld is grounded in real-world geographic structure and allows external world states to evolve along their own temporal processes while preserving verifiable state histories. LiveGeo places geographic tasks within this evolving environment, requiring agents to actively acquire task-relevant information, verify whether the evidence supporting prior decisions remains valid, and revise their plans when necessary. Our results reveal that even frontier LLMs struggle with static tasks, with no model consistently excelling across tasks, while strong static performance does not ensure dynamic reliability. Further analysis identifies a key bottleneck: agents struggle to acquire and translate relevant evidence into valid decisions and maintain their correctness as the world evolves. By releasing LiveGeo together with its GeoWorld platform, we aim to provide the community with a flexible and extensible infrastructure for studying the next generation of agents capable of reliable action in evolving geographic worlds.

#02Nov 12, 2026

cs.LG

Negative-Only Policy Optimization for One-Sided Verifiable Rewards

Jiacheng Xu, Shuo He, Fuxiang Zhang and 2 more

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) typically relies on a verifier that can reliably judge whether sampled solutions are correct. However, in many realistic settings, complete verification is generally unavailable, while cheap checks can only falsify failures. We formalize this regime as one-sided verifiability (OSV): verified negatives are reliable counterexamples, but verified positives are merely non-falsified candidates and may contain many false positives. This asymmetry makes standard RLVR unreliable, because reinforcing verified positives can directly reward shortcuts that pass partial checks. To address this issue, we propose Negative-Only Policy Optimization (NOPO), which treats verified positives as unlabeled and updates the policy only by suppressing trusted verified negatives. Specifically, NOPO combines a reference-relative negative suppression loss with a group-level adapter that scales each update by the proportion of non-falsified responses. Across unit-test, constraint-check, and LLM self-verifiers, NOPO improves pass@k over baselines on code, logic, and math benchmarks when oracle rewards are unavailable. These gains persist under inference-time scaling and cross-benchmark transfer.

#03Nov 12, 2026

stat.ME

When Both Sides Adapt: The Challenges of Evaluating Interactive LLM Systems

Hannah Li

In interactive systems where users engage with LLMs, users are adaptive and, after observing LLM responses, can change their prompting strategy, as well as the type and difficulty of subsequent tasks. Thus model responses can influence the set of prompts on which the model is subsequently evaluated. We study the implications of this user adaptivity and prompt endogeneity for the evaluation of LLMs. We define two classes of estimands for comparing models: the common-distribution effect, which compares model performance on the same distribution of prompts, and the induced-distribution effect, which compares each model on the prompt distribution generated through user interaction. We show that offline benchmark evaluation and live A/B testing target different quantities, with the standard difference-in-means estimators for the two methods converging to the common-distribution effect and the induced-distribution effect, respectively. This distinction can affect decision-making: the two comparisons can rank models differently and lead to discrepancies in deployment recommendations. We characterize when such ranking reversals occur and provide a sufficient condition under which the rankings are guaranteed to agree. This result provides a practical heuristic for assessing whether offline evaluation is sufficient to reproduce the decision suggested by a live experiment. Third, we show, in a stylized linear model of interactions, that user adaptivity can increase variance in estimation. Finally, we discuss implications of user adaptivity for the interpretation of experiments and show that adaptivity creates a common mechanism leading to common evaluation challenges, such as reward hacking and novelty effects. Together, this work highlights the necessity of measuring both model performance as well as changes in the user behavior that the model induces.

#04Nov 12, 2026

cs.CL

ArchSpace: Recording, Reviewing, and Referencing LLM Architecture Research

Jie Wang, Tong Zhu, JiaHao Kuang and 8 more

Model architecture shapes the scaling behavior, training efficiency, and inference cost of LLMs, making it a central focus of both industry and academia. In industry, teams such as those behind DeepSeek, Qwen, and Kimi routinely introduce architectural innovations, yet public reports rarely document which ideas succeeded, which were abandoned, and why. In academia, limited compute and inconsistent baselines often restrict evaluations to small-scale, single-point comparisons, making it difficult to establish whether improvements hold at larger scales or translate into broader impact. ArchSpace addresses both gaps as a public platform for Recording, Reviewing, and Referencing Architecture Researc}: each proposal is recorded with its experiments and reasoning, reviewed by the community, and referenced by later work. To evaluate ideas before costly large-scale training, ArchSpace leverages scaling laws to predict model loss at larger scales from smaller experiments, a practice widely adopted in industry. We provide initial references that make the platform usable: Qwen3.5 and OLMo3 baselines, fitted scaling laws, and a reusable training recipe. Ideas validated through this review can in turn become new baselines, and ArchSpace thereby aims to broaden the range of ideas that shape the next generation of models.

#05Nov 12, 2026

cs.CL

Synthesis Smuggling: Maliciously Hiding Inferred Personal Attributes in LLM Outputs

Gautam Galada, Supreeth Shastri, Sagnik Ray Choudhury

We propose Synthesis Smuggling, a novel threat model in which an adversarial LLM infers sensitive information about a user from routine assistance-seeking interactions and steganographically encodes that into innocuous-looking model-generated content. The user may then unknowingly transmit that information by sharing the generated artifact, say as an email, social-media post, or message, through ordinary communication channels. An adversary monitoring these channels can discover this information. We demonstrate this threat by training two open-weight models to infer gender and age-group labels from conversational cues and encode their predictions using invisible characters or word choices. These results show that user-shared model outputs can become a covert channel for personal inferences, even when the model itself has no direct means of contacting an adversary.