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

#01Oct 22, 2026

cs.SE

VERA: A Responsible AI Dashboard for Assessing LLM Deployments in Light of the EU AI Act

Robin Quériaux, Solveig Bachellery, Léa Déléris and 4 more

Institutions that deploy large language models in regulated settings often need technical evidence of responsible AI practices before approving a deployment. COMPL-AI provides a technical interpretation of the EU AI Act that organises this evidence under six principle groups and eighteen technical requirements, twelve of which current benchmarks can measure. The benchmark suites that produce this evidence are typically operated from a command line, while the staff who approve deployments are non-engineers. We present VERA, an open-source self-hosted dashboard deployed to facilitate responsible AI processes within a large European bank. A reviewer selects a model and runs public benchmarks against it. VERA scores the twelve requirements that current benchmarks can measure and instruments the energy consumed by each evaluation, adding run-level evidence for environmental impact. We run four served open-weight models through the requirement pipeline, and the dashboard displays a score for each measurable requirement. A within-subject study then compares how participants read these benchmark results: from the raw output files in one condition, and through the VERA dashboard in the other. The dashboard reduced the time needed to perform the responsible AI assessment, reducing the time required from 56 seconds using raw files to 30 seconds using our dashboard, on average. Our dashboard scored highly (4.36 out of 5) on usefulness in the survey conducted within the organization. The dashboard and the study material are released publicly to promote replicability and reproducibility in different organisational contexts.

#02Oct 22, 2026

cs.AI

What Makes a Good Unmasking Policy? A Controlled Study of Learned Unmasking in Diffusion Language Models

Jinya Sakurai, Xun Xu, Jaehong Yoon

Masked diffusion language models generate tokens in parallel, but their efficiency depends on which predictions are committed. Learned unmasking policies improve the speed--accuracy trade-off, yet differ in supervision, inputs, and capacity, obscuring which choices matter. We view supervised policies as distilling a decoding procedure through a teacher and examine independently what the teacher labels as committable, on which states the policy imitates it, what the policy observes, and how much the number of function evaluations (NFE) must decrease to offset policy overhead. We find that labeling predictions matching the final output is overly permissive at low NFE, and hidden states are weak alone but can complement confidence. About a 10% NFE reduction suffices to offset policy overhead for policies up to 7.5M parameters across tested settings. We therefore train a policy on trajectory-contraction targets, which accept only commitments staying on a reference trajectory, using confidence and hidden states. On LLaDA-8B-Instruct, the resulting 856K-parameter policy achieves the best accuracy--NFE frontier and highest throughput on GSM8K, is competitive at moderate targets on MATH-500 and HumanEval, and largely transfers to Dream-7B-Instruct.

#03Oct 22, 2026

cs.AI

Simulated Control Evals

Jeffrey Olmo, David Zhang, Tyler Tracy

Control evaluations measure whether safeguards can prevent an AI model from causing undesired outcomes even when it is intentionally trying to do so. These evaluations typically use purpose-built control settings and extrapolate their results to a model's deployment. However, the effectiveness of safeguards in deployment can depend on features of environments and tasks that control settings do not represent. To broaden where control evaluations can be run, we introduce simulated control evaluations (SCEs), which use a language model to simulate tool responses in place of an environment. We evaluate SCEs on LinuxArena, where execution provides ground-truth outcomes. We compare SCE prediction errors with those from a separate control setting, BashArena, and with variation in control metrics within LinuxArena. For independently sampled evaluation and deployment task sets, SCEs predict safety with a root mean squared error of 3.6 percentage points across five monitors at a 5% audit budget, compared with 10.1 for BashArena. SCEs closely reproduce distributions of attack strategies, attacker reasoning, and monitor reasoning, with over tenfold lower KL divergence from execution than BashArena. SCEs explain 78-85% of the between-environment variance in attack success, monitor scores, and safety. This accuracy is sample efficient: SCEs predict safety with less error than BashArena using fewer than 5% as many task-pair draws as the deployment task set. Strategies discovered through simulation also improve monitor performance on held-out LinuxArena attacks, outperforming BashArena and approximately matching improvement from executed strategies. These results suggest that deployment-specific SCEs can be more predictive than control evaluations executed in separate control settings.

#04Oct 22, 2026

cs.AI

Who Is Sycophantic to Whom? Confident LLMs, Human Deference, and the Collapse of Trust Calibration

Deepthika S, Pawni Yadav, B. Sankar

Research on sycophancy asks whether large language models (LLMs) bend towards what their users want to hear. We ask the reverse question: when an LLM is confident, consistent, and wrong, do users bend towards it? In a within-subjects experiment, 32 participants learned up to five science topics by chatting with five assistants built on the same model (GPT-5-mini). Unknown to participants, each assistant's briefing had 0, 25, 50, 75, or 100% of its facts replaced by plausible falsehoods, and every assistant spoke with full confidence. A surprise quiz after each topic offered the correct fact, the planted falsehood, and two distractors, with a confidence rating for every answer. Across 104 quizzes and 1,040 answers, scores fell from 7.4 to 2.9 out of 10, and the planted option was chosen on 60% of falsified items against 11% of correctly taught ones (odds ratio 12.5). Transcript coding showed that whenever the assistant stated a falsehood, it was adopted about 65% of the time at every falsification level. Absorbed falsehoods were held with high confidence (8.4/10), the modeled confidence advantage of right over wrong answers vanished, and the discrimination of confidence for correctness fell from an AUROC of 0.70 to chance, while post-task trust ratings barely moved. Participants tended to return to the chat more when the assistant was worse, but returning went with more absorption, not less, and 30% of all turns pasted quiz questions back to the source being checked. The assistant itself was almost never sycophantic and never conceded under pushback. We introduce a baseline-corrected Human Deference Index to quantify this human-side sycophancy and argue that trustworthiness is a property of the human-AI pair, that sycophancy evaluations should measure both directions, and that learning interfaces must make reliability legible claim by claim.

#05Oct 22, 2026

cs.LG

Efficient and Optimal Learning of Discrete Distributions with Person-Level Privacy

Gautam Kamath, Mahbod Majid, Ankur Moitra and 2 more

We study learning a discrete distribution under person-level differential privacy in the batched setting. Given $n$ users, each contributing $m$ i.i.d. samples from an unknown distribution $μ$ over $[k]$, we seek an estimate of $μ$ with total-variation error $α$. We give polynomial-time algorithms under both pure and approximate differential privacy. Under pure $(\varepsilon,0)$-DP, we achieve $n = \widetilde O(k/(α^2 m)+k/(α\sqrt{m}\varepsilon)+k/\varepsilon)$, the first polynomial-time pure-DP guarantee matching the information-theoretic optimum up to logarithmic factors. Under approximate $(\varepsilon,δ)$-DP, we achieve $n = \widetilde O(k/(α^2 m)+k/(α\sqrt{m}\varepsilon)+k+\log(1/δ)/\varepsilon)$. At $δ=2^{-Θ(k)}$, this is $\widetilde O(k)$ for fixed $α,\varepsilon,m$ and failure probability. Our algorithms use a new degree-6 sum-of-squares estimator for learning from untrusted batches. Its key ingredient is a trace-bounded diagonal majorizer for the difference between the empirical covariance of the repaired batch averages and the multinomial covariance predicted by their mean. We prove that clean data admit this certificate through semidefinite-programming duality and a new application of the stronger symmetric form of Grothendieck's inequality due to Friedland and Lim. The certificate preserves the mean-dependent variance of multinomial batch averages, yielding the near-optimal robust rate $O(η\sqrt{\log(1/η)/m})$ and providing the score required by the privacy reduction. We also prove a statistical query lower bound ruling out a uniformly smaller order of error under fixed polynomial SQ resource bounds.