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

LiveGeo: Benchmarking Geographic Agents in Continuously Evolving Worlds

Pengcheng Zhou, Xuanyu Liu, Yanchen Yin and 6 more

We introduce GeoWorld, a controllable and continuously evolving geographic environment platform for LLM agents, and LiveGeo, a benchmark for evaluating reliable decision-making in real-world geographic environments using GeoWorld. Unlike existing evaluations that largely reason and plan over fixed geographic states, GeoWorld is grounded in real-world geographic structure and allows external world states to evolve along their own temporal processes while preserving verifiable state histories. LiveGeo places geographic tasks within this evolving environment, requiring agents to actively acquire task-relevant information, verify whether the evidence supporting prior decisions remains valid, and revise their plans when necessary. Our results reveal that even frontier LLMs struggle with static tasks, with no model consistently excelling across tasks, while strong static performance does not ensure dynamic reliability. Further analysis identifies a key bottleneck: agents struggle to acquire and translate relevant evidence into valid decisions and maintain their correctness as the world evolves. By releasing LiveGeo together with its GeoWorld platform, we aim to provide the community with a flexible and extensible infrastructure for studying the next generation of agents capable of reliable action in evolving geographic worlds.

#02Nov 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.

#03Nov 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.

#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

quant-ph

Programming Quantum Circuit Parameters with Large Language Models

Tiago de Souza Farias, Caio Moraes Porto, Matheus da Silva Fonseca and 3 more

Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated the ability to generate parameters for variational quantum circuits without conventional optimization. However, the conditions under which this approach is effective remain unclear. Here, we investigate a frozen, general-purpose LLM that generates complete circuit parameter vectors from symbolic circuit and Hamiltonian descriptions, with optional iterative energy feedback. We evaluate the approach on general random Hamiltonians, structured parent Hamiltonians, and molecular systems. For general Hamiltonians, LLM-generated parameters exhibit larger energy errors than conventional Adam optimization, while additional feedback generally provides limited improvement. In contrast, for structured Hamiltonians, the LLM can generate promising low-energy parameter configurations, suggesting that identifiable physical and mathematical structure facilitates parameter inference. We also show that direct LLM predictions of minimum energies can violate the Hamiltonian spectral lower bound, whereas generated circuit parameters allow independent evaluation of physically realizable energy expectation values. Finally, we investigate blind circuit interpretation and find that the LLM can predict measurement outcomes even when it fails to identify the underlying quantum algorithm. These findings highlight the role of problem structure, the limitations of iterative LLM optimization, and the importance of independently verifiable predictions in quantum parameter programming.