#01Nov 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.
#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
cs.LG
Two mathematical models of knowledge distillation
Audrey Xie, Ludwig Schmidt, John Duchi
Many hypotheses compete to explain the successes of knowledge distillation. To help address this, we propose and analyze a mathematical model of distillation, which suggests that distillation's performance comes not from obtaining better models but from easier to optimize landscapes. For generalized linear models trained with stochastic gradient descent, we prove that distillation fits performant student models asymptotically more quickly than non-distilled models. In rank-1 matrix approximation, we characterize conditions on the target matrix under which gradient descent with distillation converges strictly faster than training on the supervised objective. The theory helps delineate the ways distillation provides benefits (i.e., in optimization speed, not in generalization), and experiments on real datasets corroborate the theoretical predictions.
#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.AI
Classical Energies Learn to Reason 1,000x Faster than Looped Models
Benjamin Hoover, Hugh Blayney, James C. R. Whittington
Looped models have emerged as a prominent paradigm for reasoning, with successes on simple reasoning puzzles such as Sudoku-Extreme and Maze-Unique. However, these models can be unstable, slow to train, and use many parameters and FLOPs to solve simple puzzles. Descent on an energy not only mitigates these issues but also offers advantages: built-in early stopping, compute that adapts to problem difficulty, fast training without differentiating through a solver, and interpretable weights that learn the constraints of the puzzle. Here we demonstrate this with a learned version of Hopfield & Tank's energy from the 80s, which we term CRAM, solves 99.996% of Sudoku-Extreme and 100% of Maze-Unique test puzzles after 42 ms and 132 ms of training on one GPU, at least 1,000x faster than looped models on these tasks. CRAM also matches baseline looped models at their highest accuracy on Sudoku-Extreme using at least 282x fewer inference FLOPs. Our work suggests two things. First, that energies are an extremely promising direction for training reasoning from data. Second, a caution against using trivially solvable benchmarks like Sudoku and Maze to test the scalability of looped reasoning techniques.