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 10, 2026

cs.AI

Comparative Analysis of Agent Evaluation Frameworks: Stability, Detection, and Discovery in Enterprise Analytics Agents

Howard Zhang, Chuck Arvin, Logan Brown and 3 more

Deploying LLM-based analytics agents in enterprise settings requires evaluation frameworks that can reliably detect failures across complex, multi-tool workflows. We present a three-phase comparative study of three evaluation frameworks, each representing a distinct evaluation paradigm (trace-based LLM judging, text-only LLM judging with red-teaming, and deterministic heuristics), applied to two analytics agents in a controlled research setting using frozen execution traces. Phase 1 quantifies evaluation harness stability through repeated measurements, finding that 97% of configurations meet the stability threshold and that stability patterns are agent-independent. Phase 2 measures known risk detection on 72 ground-truth test cases, where the trace-based framework achieves the best precision-recall balance (F1=0.90) while text-only evaluation matches on recall but generates 5x more false alarms. Phase 3 evaluates unknown risk discovery, uncovering 24 novel failures with zero overlap between functional testing and security red-teaming. Our results demonstrate that (1) the information available to the evaluation harness determines evaluation quality, (2) functional and security evaluation are complementary, and (3) LLM-based evaluation harnesses surface subtle errors that human reviewers miss. We recommend a two-framework strategy: trace-based evaluation for functional assessment and adversarial red-teaming for security validation.

#02Nov 10, 2026

cs.LG

DnNP: Denoising Input Uncertainty in Neural Processes

Fatemeh Tohidian, Chengzhi Shi, Soomi Lee and 4 more

Neural Processes (NPs) are flexible meta-learning models capable of uncertainty quantification across diverse applications. However, the standard NP framework assumes access to noise-free inputs. This is unrealistic in many practical settings, where sensor noise or measurement errors are unavoidable. This discrepancy between model assumptions and real-world data can significantly degrade prediction quality and uncertainty estimates. We introduce Denoising Neural Processes (DnNPs), a principled extension of the NP framework that explicitly models input uncertainty. We train DnNPs via variational inference. DnNPs jointly learn to denoise corrupted inputs and perform meta-learning, making them robust to noisy training data. We demonstrate DnNPs' effectiveness on both synthetic and real-world datasets, showing consistent improvements in prediction and uncertainty quantification compared to standard NPs. On PM2.5 spatial interpolation from real-world air quality sensors, DnNP reduces RMSE by up to 30% and NLL by up to 73% relative to standard NPs. We also provide theoretical grounding: we show that the Bayes-optimal predictor under noisy inputs belongs to the DnNP model class, and that plug-in models with fixed observation variance incur an irreducible KL divergence gap that DnNP provably avoids.

#03Nov 10, 2026

cs.AI

ReTrace: Distilling Tool-Using Agents into Planner-Free Workflows

Kaiyuan Hou, Yang Ping Kuo, Indranil Bhattacharya and 6 more

Business process automation runs the same Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) again and again on new inputs. Large Language Model (LLM) agents can follow an SOP written in natural language, but they call an LLM to choose every step of every run, which adds latency and cost at scale. We present ReTrace, which turns an SOP and a few logged agent runs into a reusable workflow in which code, not an LLM, selects the next step. The agent's reasoning, the explanation it writes with each tool call, often states why it took an action; the tool calls alone do not. ReTrace extracts the condition behind each step, merges these conditions across runs into a compact rule document, and generates an executable workflow from it. Only this last stage depends on the platform, so rule documents can be compiled for different orchestration platforms. On $79$ procedures from our production platform, ReTrace workflows reach $93.8\%$ completion, against $96.8\%$ for the agent, at $24\%$ lower cost per task. On $τ^2$-Bench, they reach $75.8\%$ task success (agent: $80.6\%$) and run in $1.3$s instead of $170$s; three rounds of repair on training failures lift $k{=}2$ workflows from $66.7\%$ to $81.2\%$. On eight SOP-Bench procedures, ReTrace without repair trails few-shot generation ($80.6\%$ vs. $83.6\%$), but repair from labeled training failures lifts it to $87.8\%$ at $0.40$s per task, compared to $85.5\%$ in $46.6$s for the agent.

#04Nov 10, 2026

stat.ML

A Theory of Cross-Validation Variance

Nathaniel S. O'Connell, Jaime L. Speiser

Cross-validation estimates predictive performance by repeatedly splitting the data into training and validation sets, fitting the model on the first and evaluating it on the second. Every observation influences the estimate in two roles, through its own evaluation when it is held out and through the models it helps fit when it trains. The random splits determine its weight in each role. From this representation, we prove an exact finite-sample identity for the variance of the cross-validated estimate. For a given splitting scheme with a common training set size, the variance is a function of these weights, with constants of the model, the metric, and the population. It covers metrics averaged over observations, such as mean squared error, and over case--control pairs, such as the AUC. The identity shows which schemes to use. The variance decomposes into sampling variance, which depends only on the training size, and variance due to the random fold splitting, which arises when the weights change from one draw of the splits to the next. K-fold cross-validation, whose weights are equal across observations by design, is therefore variance optimal at first order; Monte Carlo and bootstrap cross-validation are not. The first-order variance of K-fold does not depend on K, and under reasonable conditions on the model leave-one-out has the smallest variance of any K-fold scheme. For the AUC the same holds for leave-pair-out, which evaluates every case--control pair. Finally, we show the cross-validated estimate is asymptotically normal with the identity's full variance. Together, these results provide a general theoretical foundation for inference on cross-validated performance and establish principles for selecting variance-optimal cross-validation designs.

#05Nov 10, 2026

cs.LG

Forward-Value Discretization: Faster Stochastic Diffusion Sampling Without High-Order Approximation

Yuchen Jiao, Na Li, Changxiao Cai and 2 more

Stochastic diffusion samplers often require substantially more neural function evaluations (NFEs) than deterministic samplers to achieve comparable sample quality. Although higher-order discretization accelerates deterministic sampling, its benefits for stochastic sampling remains unclear. We establish matching upper and worst-case lower bounds showing that stochastic samplers with higher-order approximations remain first-order convergent, even with exact score functions. Thus, increasing the approximation order does not generally improve the convergence order. Motivated by this limitation, we introduce forward-value discretization, a training-free framework that evaluates the data/noise prediction model at a lookahead estimate constructed from previous predictions. For deterministic sampling, the resulting Forward DPMSolver (F-DPMSolver), improves sample quality at low NFE budgets through its DDIM-based variant, despite remaining first-order convergent. For stochastic sampling, we develop Forward DDPM (F-DDPM), which evaluates the model at a cleaner lookahead point adjusted for subsequent noise injection. This estimate reuses both the previous model prediction and the previously injected noise. Both variants admit first-order convergence guarantees with one model evaluation per iteration. Across CIFAR-10, ImageNet, FFHQ, and LSUN, F-DDPM consistently achieves lower FID than the evaluated stochastic baselines at matched NFE budgets. With 1.5 times as many NFEs as deterministic baselines, it achieves competitive sample quality, narrowing the practical efficiency gap between stochastic and deterministic sampling. Code is available at https://github.com/Na-Li66/F-DDPM.