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

stat.ML

Quantifying structural stability of transparent models for general insurance pricing

Félix Côté, Marie-Pier Côté

The short duration of general insurance contracts leads to rapid distributional shifts in the data, warranting regular model updates. This process may yield a post-update model that differs considerably from the pre-update model in both predictions and structure. Structural stability is upstream of predictive stability, yet existing structural stability metrics are mostly restricted to simple decision trees. Thus, we first introduce the notion of functional transparency, characterising models with a prediction function that can be expressed as a sum of univariate functions for main effects and bivariate functions for pairwise interactions. Then, we propose the Mean Squared Shape function distance, a metric to quantify the structural stability of functionally transparent models, which are particularly relevant in actuarial science. Using three public auto insurance datasets, we present a benchmark study to demonstrate the usefulness of our metric in identifying a stable and accurate transparent model. Generalised linear models with centred numerical covariates are stable, and explainable boosting machines (EBMs) offer a compromise between stability and performance. We also find that stabilisation strategies, such as sequential modelling and fixed hyperparameters, can substantially improve stability for both EBM and XGBoost models, with negligible impact on performance.

#02Nov 12, 2026

cs.LG

Towards a Theory of Learnability via Debate

Tosca Lechner, Vinayak Pathak, Sivan Sabato and 1 more

Debate has been recently proposed as a training protocol that is hoped to produce more aligned models even as model capabilities scale. The idea is that the human, instead of providing supervision in the form of labels, judges a debate between two models that compete to prove the correctness of opposite labels. It can be shown that functions of a much higher computational complexity can be correctly judged in this way, compared to the complexity of functions that can be directly evaluated using a computationally weak evaluator. This suggests that perhaps debate can be used to teach very complicated functions to models. However, previous work has largely ignored the fact that this is a training protocol, and simply analyzes the game being played between the two debaters for a known judge. We take the first steps towards understanding the learning problem implicit within the protocol, by formulating it as an online learning problem. We show that once we formulate the learning problem precisely, there are cases where the best way to learn given access to a judge is different from running an adversarial debate. This motivates us to define a cooperative version of the protocol, whose learnability we characterize using a combinatorial dimension. We also consider the possibility of the human judge being fallible and occasionally judging the debate incorrectly. We show that a small number of errors in judgement can lead to a large error in learning.

#03Nov 12, 2026

cs.IR

Sheaf-Inspired Structured Scoring Extensions of LightGCN for Collaborative Filtering

Ksenia Belkovskaya, Timur Lidzhiev, Maria Stebliy and 1 more

Graph-based collaborative filtering learns user and item representations by propagating embeddings over a user--item interaction graph. We investigate a modular, sheaf-inspired scoring extension placed on top of a three-layer LightGCN backbone. The motivation comes from cellular sheaves, where local vector spaces are related by linear restriction maps; here, this idea motivates structured, pair-dependent transformations of user and item embeddings rather than a change to graph propagation. We compare the identity inner-product scorer, diagonal, rank-one low-rank, and full matrix residual scorers, and a parameter-matched residual MLP baseline (\texttt{mlp\_full}) on Amazon-Book, Gowalla, MovieLens-1M, and Yelp2018. We report ranking quality and catalog coverage at cutoffs 10 and 20. The selected structured variants show modest, dataset-dependent changes in ranking quality and sometimes substantial changes in coverage. Our method is inspired by sheaf geometry but does not construct a cellular sheaf or implement sheaf-Laplacian diffusion; the experiments therefore do not establish a causal benefit from sheaf geometry itself.

#04Nov 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.

#05Nov 12, 2026

cs.AI

Ballad: Bandit-Based LLM Routing for Automated Heuristic Discovery

Samidha Verma, Ankit Anand, Sayan Ranu

Modern automated heuristic discovery (AHD) systems increasingly rival hand-crafted heuristics by leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) to iteratively mutate and refine solutions. A natural assumption is that more powerful and more expensive models consistently yield better heuristics. We challenge this empirically: across multiple NP-hard combinatorial optimization problems, we find no consistent advantage for larger, costlier models. This raises a deeper question: given a pool of LLMs spanning frontier and freely hosted or open-weight models, how should one adaptively select which model to invoke at each step of the search? The challenge is non-trivial. The optimal LLM may shift over the course of a run, and because one LLM's output seeds the context for subsequent calls, each model's reward signal is non-stationary and entangled across the heuristic population, thus violating the independence assumptions of classical online decision-making settings. We address this through Ballad (Bandit-based LLM Routing for Automated Heuristic Discovery), an online bandit algorithm that learns to orchestrate a pool of LLMs into an ensemble that matches or exceeds what any soloist LLM achieves alone. This orchestration is powered by an LLM selection policy that favors rare, high-scoring heuristics over stable averages, a DAG-based credit propagation mechanism through the genealogy of the heuristic population, and discounting of stale observations to remain attuned to each model's current utility. Across five NP-hard combinatorial optimization problems and a pool of four models of varying capability and cost, Ballad not only matches the best individual LLM in hindsight but, in several cases, surpasses every individual model while reducing API cost by up to 65.6% relative to always using the strongest model.