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

AgentSSL: Can MLE Agents Leverage Unlabeled Data?

Ethan Lin, Akanksha Sarkar, Ziang Liu and 2 more

Applying machine learning systems to new domains introduces bottlenecks in both labeled data acquisition and manual pipeline engineering. While recent MLE agents show promise in automating pipeline design, they have been studied almost exclusively in fully supervised settings, leaving them untested in realistic regimes where labeled data is scarce but unlabeled data is abundant. In this work, we introduce Agentic Semi-Supervised Learning (AgentSSL), framing SSL as a program search problem and studying how agents navigate this space under limited supervision. We find that even under weak feedback and matched compute, agents can synthesize code that combines and adapts established SSL techniques, exceeding the strongest human-engineered baselines in 8 of 12 settings by up to +21.8%. However, our results identify program selection as a critical bottleneck in AgentSSL, where performance drops by as much as 47% when selecting based on the agent's feedback metric. To systematically study this bottleneck, we introduce ProgramSelectBench, a large-scale benchmark with a combined total of 16,977 agent-generated and human-engineered SSL programs, and evaluate both unsupervised and active program selection methods. We further evaluate AgentSSL on real-world ecology detection tasks, highlighting the opportunities and challenges of transferring agent-discovered strategies beyond controlled benchmarks.

#02Nov 12, 2026

cs.LG

Metal Sandbox: Isolated Execution and Command Scheduling for GPU Coding Agents on Apple Silicon

Haozhe Wang, Lina Chen, Fanqi Wan and 5 more

On-device inference requires kernels that make effective use of local accelerators. Efficient training and evaluation of models that generate Apple Metal kernels benefit from native macOS tools and concurrent agent sessions. These sessions alternate between model requests, development commands, and GPU execution, leaving GPU capacity idle for much of a rollout. We present Metal Sandbox, infrastructure that combines restricted per-instance file access, native command execution, and command-level scheduling across interconnected Macs. Each agent retains its workspace and private development environment. Parallel commands can run concurrently, while serial commands share one execution slot per node; eligible waiting commands can migrate to available Macs and return results to the original agent. Integration with Harbor supports task execution, automatic verification, and rollout collection through a common workflow. Controlled experiments on four Mac mini M4 nodes achieve $1.68\times$--$2.05\times$ gains in command throughput under concentrated demand. Sixteen static agent traces give an estimated $2.14\times$ sustained-throughput gain for four sessions per node versus one, assuming continuously replenished sessions and unchanged mean durations. Replaying these measured traces under dynamic scheduling reduces mean tool waiting by 18.8% and batch elapsed time by 22.3%, assuming unchanged phase durations. Metal Sandbox and its Harbor integration are open-source on GitHub.

#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.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.LG

Introducing Feedback Delays to Non-Delayed Adversarial MDPs: Optimal $\sqrt S$ and $\sqrt K$ Dependencies in Tabular and Linear AMDPs

Aarush Kulkarni, Khang Nguyen, William Chang and 1 more

We study regret minimization in episodic Adversarial Markov Decision Processes (AMDPs) with unknown transitions and bandit feedback. In tabular AMDPs with $S$ states, $A$ actions, and horizon $H$, the best known $K$-episode regret is $\tilde O(HS\sqrt{AK})$, whose $\sqrt S$ gap to the $Ω(H\sqrt{SAK})$ lower bound has long remained open. In linear AMDPs with $d$-dimensional features, after a five-year line of improvements starting from $K^{14/15}$, computationally efficient algorithms without a simulator or exploratory assumptions still only attain $\tilde O(K^{3/4})$ regret. A common challenge in both settings is to estimate the Q-function of a changing policy: past data comes from earlier policies that differ from (and are correlated with) the current one, while freezing the policy for future episodes worsens the dependency on $K$. We instead propose a general technique called introduced feedback delays: we estimate the Q-function of the policy using future episodes while still updating the policy, as if the feedback were delayed. While feedback delays are usually an obstacle imposed by the environment, here they are introduced voluntarily and, perhaps surprisingly, come at no extra cost. We develop Geometric Resampling with Rejection (GRR) to account for policy changes during the delay, and threshold the visitation probabilities to avoid long delays on rarely visited state-action pairs. With this unified technique, our policy optimization algorithms achieve, with high probability, $\tilde O(\text{poly}(H)\sqrt{SAK})$ regret in tabular AMDPs, resolving the open problem; and $\tilde O(\text{poly}(d,H)\sqrt K)$ regret in linear AMDPs, giving the first efficient algorithm optimal in $K$. They also naturally extend to delayed AMDPs with a total feedback delay $\mathfrak D$, yielding the first bounds optimal in $S$ and $\mathfrak D$ (tabular) and in $K$ and $\mathfrak D$ (linear).